State v. Toki
2011 UT App 293
| Utah Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Defendant Toki was charged in 2007 with discharging a firearm in the direction of a building, possession of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person, and aggravated assault; Kamoto was originally charged but later severed from the case, leaving Kamoto as the sole codefendant for trial; the court severed the restricted-person element from the possession charge; the State sought expert gang testimony from Detective Break Merino regarding the Tongan Crip Gang (TCG); trial in October 2008 resulted in convictions for possession of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person and unlawful discharge with an in-concert enhancement, with aggravated assault acquittal and no new trial granted; Mele and Myla testified about the events at a February 3, 2007 family party, including gunfire, a carjacking attempt, and a subsequent assault; the State introduced Merino as an expert on gangs to link Defendant to Kamoto and Maumau; a trial-court altercation in the hallway occurred during the trial but the court gave a curative instruction and excluded some people.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Restricted-person references improper and prejudicial | State argued invited error; Toki preserved issue | Toki did not invite error; references were inadvertent | No reversible error; curative instruction sufficed |
| Juror bias due to hallway altercation | Jurors could have been biased; trial court should have probed | Court acted within discretion; curative instruction adequate | No abuse of discretion; cautionary instruction appropriate |
| Admission of gang expert testimony | Needed to prove identity and in-concert element; probative value high | Much of testimony irrelevant/prejudicial beyond probative value | Admission harbored some error but not reversible; did not alter verdicts; not reversible on appeal |
| Cumulative error | Multiple errors together deprived fair trial | Cumulative effect undermines confidence in verdict | No reversal for cumulative error; majority |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johnson, 771 P.2d 1071 (Utah 1989) (reversal requires substantial and prejudicial error likely to change outcome)
- State v. Harmon, 956 P.2d 262 (Utah 1998) (curative instruction may mitigate improper testimony)
- State v. Rimmasch, 775 P.2d 388 (Utah 1989) (prejudice analysis for admission of certain evidence)
- State v. Burk, 839 P.2d 880 (Utah Ct. App. 1992) (test for prejudice in admission of evidence)
- State v. Saunders, 699 P.2d 738 (Utah 1985) (prior bad character prejudice when evidence relates to restricted-person status)
- State v. Gonzales, 2005 UT 72, 125 P.3d 878 (Utah 2005) (cumulative error standard; fair-trial confidence)