Background
Michael Hall faced one sodomy count and six aggravated-sexual-abuse counts involving a child who knew him as her grandfather. After a seven-day trial, jurors acquitted him on most counts and convicted him on two aggravated-sexual-abuse counts. Hall argued the verdict lacked constitutionally required unanimity and challenged a supplemental verdict-urging instruction, often called an Allen charge.
The case involved multiple alleged acts and a jury communication during deliberations. Hall contended jurors might have disagreed about the specific acts supporting the convictions. But his opening appellate brief did not invoke an exception to preservation for the Allen-charge issue, even though the State acknowledged the instruction was unbalanced.
The Court’s Holding
The court found no reversible unanimity error. The charging structure, evidence, instructions, and verdict did not establish a reasonable likelihood that jurors convicted on materially different factual bases without the agreement Utah law requires. The mixed verdict further showed jurors differentiated among the allegations rather than returning an undifferentiated result.
The court declined to reach the Allen-charge merits because the claim was unpreserved and Hall did not argue plain error, ineffective assistance, or another preservation exception in his opening brief. A concurrence emphasized that the trial court should have consulted counsel before delivering the concededly infirm instruction and warned that party input can prevent avoidable appellate disputes. The convictions remained affirmed.
Key Takeaways
- A unanimity challenge must connect multiple factual theories to the particular counts and demonstrate a realistic risk of juror disagreement.
- An unpreserved instruction claim needs a properly briefed exception to Utah’s preservation rule.
- Trial courts should consult counsel before giving supplemental verdict-urging instructions and keep the language balanced.
Why It Matters
Hall is both a preservation lesson and a trial-management warning. Utah appellate lawyers must expressly brief the route around nonpreservation in the opening brief. Trial lawyers should request to review any supplemental instruction, state specific objections, and ensure the instruction does not pressure minority jurors or imply that a verdict must be reached.