Opinion ID: 2543450
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Single Criminal Objective

Text: ¶ 16 The State argued to the trial court that the attempt to murder Majnik was to prevent him from being able to testify about Benzon's murder, thus linking the two crimes in one criminal episode. The trial court found that (1) Majnik did indeed witness Benzon's murder, (2) he could identify defendant's and Swank's faces, and therefore could identify defendant as Benzon's killer, and (3) defendant ran from the crime scene and hid his gun, indicating that he was trying to hide the crimes, conduct which is also consistent with witness elimination. The trial court found that viewing the facts in a light most favorable to the prosecution, ... the magistrate justifiably concluded that the defendant attempted to kill Majnik ... to eliminate him as a witness to the murder of Benzon and ... that the acts constituting the murder and attempted murder were bound together by a single criminal objective. The trial court then appropriately cited the case of State v. Lopez, 789 P.2d 39, 42 (Utah App.1990), which held, in the context of joinder and severance, that murder coupled with another crime to avoid responsibility for the murder constitutes a single criminal objective linking the two offenses together (as long as the time element is satisfied). ¶ 17 We affirm the trial court's finding that the two crimes constituted one criminal episode.