State v Salgado

Salgado appealed her DUI conviction. The panel affirmed. It held Salgado’s sufficiency of the evidence issue was preserved by her motion for directed verdict which the district court considered and rejected, and the denial was proper because it was undisputed Salgado was driving a car with a medication in her system and there was evidence of impairment namely Salgado drove well below the sped limit, started ahead when the officer tried to get her attention with siren and other emergency equipment and signaling with his hand to pull over, observed that her eyelids were droopy , was confused about what was going on and displayed 12 of a possible 18 clues of impairment during three field sobriety tests and the office has training and experience in evaluating drug impairment. It held that the issue of whether the district court improperly commented on the evidence in the jury instructions was preserved through Salgado’s objection to the instructions, but, affirmed holding any error in including irrelevant cofactors as to impairment was harmless as only one element was irrelevant and the instruction allowed that to be ignored in this case and the other accurately stated the law on impairment form the use of prescribed medications. It finally held there was no error in not giving a lesser included offense instruction as the testimony Salgado was driving slowly due to a flat tire meant she could not be acquitted of DUI and convicted of driving to slow.

Lay v Lay

Father appealed the modification of eth parties’ child visitation provision in the divorce decree. The panel remanded for further proceedings. It held the district court correctly construed Utah Code 30-3-55.1 to allow but not require adoption of an alternate visitation schedule for older children as it sates the court may consider certain factors and labels the schedule optional which indicates apply the schedule discretionary not mandatory and this construction does not lead to absurd results. It held the district court’s factual findings were inadequate to explain why it ordered farther to stop having Sunday nights with child during the school year as it found child was doing well with the existing schedule an did not identify any reason the change ordered was necessary and also failed to given any reason whatever for the denial of midweek visitation and reamd was thus necessary for additional fact finding.

Krahenbuhl et al. v The Cottle Firm et al.

Krahenbuhl appealed the denial of their objection to Firm’s subpoena in this legal malpractice case requiring their current attorney to turn over all documents in his file relating to the underlying lawsuit. The panel reversed and remanded  holding the material sought were covered by the attorney client privilege and it was not waived here as Firm as defendant raised a defense in which confidential communications may be relevant and Utah law only recognizes waiver when a plaintiff makes the communications at the heart of the case.