State v. Trujillo, 439 P.3d 588

Officer encountered an intoxicated minor who appeared assaulted; later returned for report of a man with a knife and found two groups arguing, including the minor, his brother Timothy Trujillo, and neighbors.
Officers detained the minors, searched, found knives, then located and arrested Trujillo; he was told he was being charged with aggravated assault.
After being told the neighbors weren’t involved, Trujillo twice stated that his "boys will be paying them a visit" and asked whether anything would happen if he went to jail—statements made while the neighbors were not present and not shown to be intended for relay to them.
State charged Trujillo under Utah’s witness-retaliation statute (Utah Code § 76-8-508.3); trial court admitted gang-affiliation evidence and an expert on gang culture; the jury convicted.
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed; the Utah Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether the statute requires that a threat be communicated or intended to be communicated to the target.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Trujillo)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether § 76-8-508.3 criminalizes threats about a witness made outside the witness’s presence without intent that the witness receive the threat	Statute requires that the speaker intend the threat to reach the target (at minimum)	Statute criminalizes making threats regarding a witness even if the witness did not hear and the speaker did not intend communication	The statute requires that the threat be made "as retaliation or retribution," which means the speaker must intend the threat to reach the targeted witness; conviction reversed
Admissibility of gang-affiliation evidence under Utah R. Evid. 403	Gang evidence was prejudicial and inadmissible	Gang evidence was probative to show the comments were threatening	Mooted by statutory interpretation holding; court did not reach the evidentiary issue

State v. Hansen, 63 P.3d 650 (Utah 2002) (standard of review on certiorari)
State v. Lambdin, 424 P.3d 117 (Utah 2017) (no deference to court of appeals on legal questions)
State v. Rasabout, 356 P.3d 1258 (Utah 2015) (textualist approach to legislative intent)
Biedermann v. Wasatch Cty., 362 P.3d 287 (Utah Ct. App. 2015) (interpretation of term meaning in context)
State v. Trujillo, 400 P.3d 1213 (Utah Ct. App. 2017) (court of appeals’ interpretation of "against" in retaliation statute)