Utah Court of Appeals
Can defendants claim self-defense while committing felonies in Utah? State v. Soules Explained
Summary
Thomas Soules was convicted of murder and aggravated robbery. He challenged the trial court’s denial of his self-defense jury instruction request, failure to give an imperfect self-defense instruction, and failure to merge the convictions.
Analysis
In State v. Soules, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether defendants can claim self-defense while committing felonies and clarified important preservation requirements for jury instructions in criminal cases.
Background and Facts
Thomas Soules was convicted of first-degree murder and first-degree aggravated robbery. During trial, Soules requested a self-defense jury instruction, which the trial court denied. On appeal, Soules challenged this denial and also argued he was entitled to an imperfect self-defense instruction. Additionally, he contended that his aggravated robbery conviction should have merged with his felony murder conviction.
Key Legal Issues
The court examined three issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the self-defense instruction request, (2) whether Soules preserved his claim for an imperfect self-defense instruction, and (3) whether the aggravated robbery conviction should merge with the felony murder conviction under Utah’s merger doctrine.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The court affirmed all convictions. Regarding self-defense, the court applied Utah Code section 76-2-402(2)(b), which explicitly states that self-defense is not available to persons “attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of a felony.” Since Soules was convicted of aggravated robbery, he fell squarely within this exception. The court also noted that felony murder is a strict liability offense requiring only the mens rea for the underlying felony, making self-defense irrelevant to the defendant’s subjective mental state regarding the killing.
On the imperfect self-defense claim, the court found it unpreserved because Soules never specifically requested such an instruction. The court rejected Soules’s argument that requesting perfect self-defense automatically preserves imperfect self-defense claims. Finally, regarding merger, the court determined the claim was unpreserved and that any error would not have been obvious given controlling precedent in State v. McCovey.
Practice Implications
This decision reinforces Utah’s strict approach to preservation of error in jury instruction challenges. Criminal defense attorneys must specifically request each desired instruction and cannot rely on broader requests to preserve related claims. The ruling also confirms that Utah maintains clear statutory limitations on self-defense claims during felony commission, providing no refuge for defendants who kill while committing predicate felonies.
Case Details
Case Name
State v. Soules
Citation
2012 UT App 238
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20100160-CA
Date Decided
August 23, 2012
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
A defendant convicted of aggravated robbery is not entitled to a self-defense jury instruction because self-defense is unavailable to persons committing felonies, and aggravated robbery does not merge with felony murder under controlling precedent.
Standard of Review
Correctness for trial court’s refusal to give jury instruction and statutory interpretation
Practice Tip
When requesting jury instructions, specifically preserve all desired instructions at trial—requesting perfect self-defense does not automatically preserve imperfect self-defense claims for appeal.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.