Todd v. State, 2011 UT App 313

Todd killed his estranged wife during an April 1999 altercation and was convicted of murder after a 2001 jury trial.
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed Todd’s conviction in 2007 (State v. Todd, 2007 UT App 349, 173 P.3d 170).
Todd filed a first post-conviction relief petition in April 2009, which was dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee.
Todd filed a substantially identical petition in March 2010; the district court dismissed frivolous claims and reached merits on only claim one and seven.
Claim one alleged a “patchwork verdict” and lack of unanimity on the murder statute’s subparts; claim seven alleged ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel for failing to raise claims.
The court held that most claims were precluded by statute for not being raised on direct appeal and that claim one lacked merit under Utah law.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the patchwork verdict claim has merit	Todd contends the jury need not agree on a single mens rea form.	State argues Saunders/Russell permit limited unanimity under murder statutes; no defect.	No merit; instruction upholds limited unanimity under Utah law.
Whether remaining nonfrivolous claims were properly precluded	Todd's other nonfrivolous claims could be raised post-conviction.	Claims raised or addressable at trial/appeal are precluded unless ineffectiveness excuse applies.	Precluded; claims not raised on direct appeal were not cognizable.
Whether ineffective assistance claims warrant relief	Counsel failed to raise numerous arguments, amounting to ineffective assistance.	Ineffectiveness claim not sufficiently supported; claims lacked merit	No relief; ineffective-assistance argument not established.
Whether the accidental-shooting theory was eligible for post-conviction review	Todd asserts the shooting was accidental and invalidates conviction.	Claim not raised in petition and precluded as direct-appeal issue.	Precluded and not addressable in post-conviction relief.
Whether prosecutorial-misconduct claims were properly pursued on post-conviction review	Prosecutorial misconduct claims were raised in direct appeal but reargued here.	Those claims were already addressed on direct appeal and are precluded.	Precluded; re-argument barred by post-conviction preclusion statute.

State v. Saunders, 992 P.2d 951 (Utah, 1999) (limited unanimity exception in murder cases)
State v. Russell, 733 P.2d 162 (Utah, 1987) (unanimity for multiple mens rea formulations in second-degree murder)
State v. Todd, 173 P.3d 170 (Utah Ct. App., 2007) (affirmed conviction)