State v. Paramoure

Summary

The Utah Court of Appeals reversed Philip Christopher Paramoure’s child-abuse conviction and remanded for a new trial. The court held that a supplemental jury instruction regarding the reasonable-discipline affirmative defense misstated the law and effectively lowered the State’s burden to disprove the defense.

Holdings

1. The supplemental instruction misstated the law and effectively lowered the State's burden to disprove Paramoure's reasonable-discipline affirmative defense. The proper inquiry was whether no objectively reasonable person would have used the level of force Paramoure used under the circumstances, not whether an objectively reasonable person would have used that same force.
2. The instructional error was prejudicial because there was a reasonable probability that, with a properly framed instruction, the jury would have acquitted Paramoure.
3. The court did not definitively decide whether the initial instruction was erroneous, because the supplemental instruction independently misstated the law and required reversal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court's initial jury instruction on the affirmative defense of reasonable discipline accurately stated Utah law.
2. Whether the supplemental jury instruction improperly lowered the State's burden to disprove the affirmative defense of reasonable discipline.
3. Whether any instructional error prejudiced Paramoure and required reversal.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded