Opinion ID: 2638563
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Plain Meaning of Unborn Child

Text: ¶ 15 In considering the meaning of a [statutory] provision, the analysis begins with the plain language of the provision.... We need not look beyond the plain language unless we find some ambiguity in it. Utah Sch. Bds. Ass'n v. State Bd. of Educ ., 2001 UT 2, ¶ 13, 17 P.3d 1125 (citation omitted). Moreover, [t]he plain language of a statute is to be read as a whole, and its provisions interpreted in harmony with other provisions in the same statute and with other statutes under the same and related chapters. Lyon v. Burton, 2000 UT 19, ¶ 17, 5 P.3d 616 (internal quotations and citations omitted). ¶ 16 In State v. Larsen, 578 P.2d 1280, 1281-82 (Utah 1978), we held that a person could not be convicted of automobile homicide for causing the death of a twenty-six-week-old fetus because a fetus was not specifically recognized in statute as a human being. In response to our decision, the legislature amended the criminal homicide statute [4] to provide that a person is guilty of criminal homicide if, acting with the requisite mental state, the person causes the death of another human being, including an unborn child. Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-201(1)(a) (1999). By its plain meaning the statute recognizes that an unborn child is a human being. ¶ 17 Defendant contends nevertheless that the statute is unconstitutionally vague because it is impossible to ascertain from statute, or otherwise, when unborn childhood begins. As a result, he argues, an ordinary person is left to guess whether his or her conduct falls within the parameters of the statute because it is unknown at what point a potential life actually becomes an unborn child. ¶ 18 Although the defendant attempts to inject doubt as to the meaning of words where no doubt would be felt by the normal reader, such straining is not required by the `void for vagueness' doctrine, and we will not indulge in it here. United States v. Powell, 423 U.S. 87, 93, 96 S.Ct. 316, 46 L.Ed.2d 228 (1975). Instead, we will attribute to the legislature the commonsense meaning of the term unborn child. Id. ¶ 19 Unborn child is defined as [t]he individual human life in existence and developing prior to birth. Black's Law Dictionary 1058 (abridged 6th ed.1991). See also Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 1285 (10th ed.1998) (defining unborn as not born, not brought into life, or existing without birth). Therefore, without modifying language to the contrary, the commonsense meaning of the term unborn child is a human being at any stage of development in utero because once fertilization occurs, an unborn child is an individual human life that is in existence and developing prior to birth.