State v. Sanislo, 359 P.3d 1287

Troy Sanislo was charged with third-degree felony aggravated assault; jury acquitted on aggravated assault but convicted of class B misdemeanor assault; trial court entered a conviction for class A misdemeanor assault after verdict.
At trial the State requested a lesser-included instruction for class A misdemeanor assault; Sanislo objected, arguing class A is not a lesser-included offense because it requires proof of substantial bodily injury.
The trial court ruled class A is a lesser-included offense of aggravated assault but also allowed instruction on class B; counsel agreed to instruct jurors on class B with the understanding a conviction would be entered as class A.
Sanislo appealed the trial court’s ruling that class A misdemeanor assault is a lesser-included offense of aggravated assault and argued he lacked notice to defend against the substantial-bodily-injury element.
The charging documents, preliminary hearing testimony, and counsel’s statements reflected allegations (blows to the head/face, bleeding, unconsciousness, broken nose, scheduled surgery) that reasonably put Sanislo on notice of substantial bodily injury.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether class A misdemeanor assault is a lesser-included offense of third-degree aggravated assault	State: Yes — aggravated assault incorporates assault as defined in §76-5-102, which includes class A variations	Sanislo: No — class A requires an extra element (substantial bodily injury) so it is not necessarily included	Held: Yes — class A assault is a lesser-included offense because §76-5-103 incorporates §76-5-102 in full
Whether the court could give a State-requested lesser-included instruction over objection	State: Permitted under the necessarily-included-offense standard when elements compare	Sanislo: Not permitted because lack of notice would prejudice his defense on substantial bodily injury	Held: Court may give instruction if defendant had adequate notice; here facts and charging papers provided notice, so no prejudice

State v. Reece, 349 P.3d 712 (Utah 2015) (standard of review and lesser-included-instruction framework)
State v. Baker, 671 P.2d 152 (Utah 1983) (distinguishes evidence-based and necessarily-included standards)
State v. Houskeeper, 62 P.3d 444 (Utah 2002) (State-requested lesser-included instruction may be given absent prejudice from lack of notice)
State v. Clark, 251 P.3d 829 (Utah 2011) (apply statute in effect at time of offense)
State v. Drej, 233 P.3d 476 (Utah 2010) (legislature defines criminal elements)
State v. Lopes, 980 P.2d 191 (Utah 1999) (enhancements are elements the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt)