Utah Court of Appeals
When must trial counsel move for directed verdict in Utah criminal cases? State v. Baer Explained
Summary
Jacob Baer and three other teenagers entered a community pool after hours with the help of a teenage lifeguard who used a key to let them in. Baer took the pool’s lockbox containing cash. Baer was convicted of burglary and theft of services and appealed, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for his attorney’s failure to move for directed verdict and failure to object to jury instructions.
Practice Areas & Topics
Analysis
The Utah Court of Appeals addressed when trial counsel’s failure to seek a directed verdict constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel in State v. Baer. This case provides important guidance on the relationship between sufficiency of evidence challenges and counsel’s duty to pursue viable motions.
Background and Facts
Eighteen-year-old Jacob Baer and three other teenagers entered a community swimming pool after hours. A teenage lifeguard used his key to let them in for “night swimming,” even though the lifeguard was not authorized to open the pool after hours. Baer subsequently took the pool’s lockbox containing cash. He was convicted of burglary and theft of services.
Key Legal Issues
Baer claimed ineffective assistance of counsel on two grounds: (1) counsel’s failure to move for directed verdict on sufficiency of evidence grounds, and (2) counsel’s failure to object to allegedly defective jury instructions regarding mental state elements.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The court applied the Strickland standard, requiring both deficient performance and resulting prejudice. Crucially, the court noted that “counsel’s performance at trial is not deficient if counsel refrains from making futile objections, motions, or requests.”
Regarding the directed verdict claim, the court explained that if “some evidence exists from which a reasonable jury could find that the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt,” then a directed verdict motion would be futile. The court found sufficient circumstantial evidence supported both convictions, including Baer’s parking away from the pool to avoid detection and the late-night timing of the unauthorized entry.
On the jury instruction issue, the court found Baer’s briefing inadequately supported his claims, failing to identify specific defects or explain how different instructions would have changed the outcome.
Practice Implications
This decision reinforces that Utah courts will not find counsel ineffective for declining to pursue motions lacking merit. Practitioners should carefully evaluate whether sufficiency challenges have realistic prospects before filing directed verdict motions. Additionally, appellate briefs must contain thorough analysis with specific citations to record evidence and legal authority to avoid inadequate briefing findings.
Case Details
Case Name
State v. Baer
Citation
2019 UT App 15
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20170479-CA
Date Decided
January 17, 2019
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
Trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance by failing to move for a directed verdict when the State presented sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find all elements of burglary and theft of services.
Standard of Review
For ineffective assistance of counsel claims raised for the first time on appeal, reviewed as a matter of law
Practice Tip
When challenging sufficiency of evidence on appeal, ensure the record clearly establishes that no reasonable jury could find all elements of the charged offense, as counsel is not required to make futile motions.
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.