State v. Potter

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

State of Utah,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Richard Lee Potter,

Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20030105-CA
 

F I L E D
(April 15, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 107

-----

Eighth District, Roosevelt Department

The Honorable John R. Anderson

Attorneys: Julie George, Salt Lake City, for Appellant

Mark L. Shurtleff and Kris C. Leonard, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

-----

Before Judges Jackson, Orme, and Thorne.

ORME, Judge:

We have determined that "[t]he facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and record[,] and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument." Utah R. App. P. 29(a)(3). Moreover, the issues presented are readily resolved under applicable law.

Absent a reply brief, the State's assertion that "the jury was never informed about the prior conviction enhancement or the existence of any prior convictions, and it was never exposed to the specific language in the information" stands unrefuted. Given that circumstance, we readily conclude that Defendant has failed to establish any prejudice resulting from the reference in
the information to a prior conviction. See State v. Ellifritz, 835 P.2d 170, 174 (Utah Ct. App. 1992).

Affirmed.

______________________________

Gregory K. Orme, Judge

-----

WE CONCUR:

______________________________

Norman H. Jackson, Judge

______________________________

William A. Thorne Jr., Judge