Summary
This Utah Supreme Court opinion addresses an interlocutory appeal concerning Rule 412 of the Utah Rules of Evidence, which governs the admissibility of a victim's prior sexual behavior in sexual misconduct cases. The court held that a defendant cannot compel a victim to testify at a pretrial Rule 412 hearing to determine the admissibility of such evidence. The district court's order denying the victim's motion to quash a subpoena was reversed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Utah Rule of Evidence 412 permits a defendant seeking to admit evidence under a Rule 412(b) exception to compel an alleged victim to testify at the rule 412(c)(3) in camera hearing.
- Whether the district court properly denied T.T.'s motion to quash the subpoena compelling her testimony.
Holdings
- A party seeking to admit evidence under a Rule 412(b) exception cannot compel the victim to testify at the Rule 412(c)(3) in camera hearing.
- The district court erred by denying T.T.'s motion to quash the subpoena compelling her testimony at the Rule 412 hearing.
Key quotations
“We hold that a party seeking to admit evidence under a rule 412(b) exception cannot compel a victim to testify at a 412 hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s denial of T.T.’s motion to quash Jolley’s subpoena, and we remand for further proceedings.” (¶ 36)
Factual background
Jolley was charged with raping T.T. Before trial, he sought to introduce evidence of specific instances of prior sexual conduct between himself and T.T. to support his claim that the charged encounter was consensual and consistent with their prior encounters. The district court concluded that Jolley had met the threshold for a Rule 412 hearing and ordered T.T. to appear and testify about her alleged prior sexual behavior. T.T. challenged that order and sought to quash the subpoena.
Procedural history
Jolley was charged with raping T.T. and was bound over for trial after a preliminary hearing at which the prosecution relied on T.T.'s recorded statements. Before trial, Jolley moved under Utah Rule of Evidence 412 for an in camera hearing concerning evidence of prior sexual conduct between him and T.T. The district court ordered T.T. to testify at the hearing and denied her motion to quash the subpoena. The Utah Supreme Court granted interlocutory review, reversed the denial of the motion to quash, and remanded.
Remand instructions
Reverse the district court's denial of T.T.'s motion to quash Jolley's subpoena and remand for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.