State v. Powell
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2013 UT App 64 _________________________________________________________ THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JASON LEE POWELL, Defendant and Appellant. Per Curiam Decision No. 20110797 CA Filed March 14, 2013 Third District, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Denise P. Lindberg No. 091910094 Peter Daines and Scott A. Wilson, Attorneys for Appellant John E. Swallow and Andrew F. Peterson, Attorneys for Appellee Before JUDGES DAVIS, VOROS, and CHRISTIANSEN. PER CURIAM: ¶1 Jason Lee Powell appeals from his convictions of aggravated robbery and criminal trespass. We affirm. ¶2 When evaluating a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, appellate courts review the evidence and all inferences which may reasonably be drawn from it in the light most favorable to the verdict of the jury. State v. Shumway, 2002 UT 124, ¶ 15, 63 P.3d 94. So long as there is some evidence, including reasonable inferences, from which findings of all the requisite elements of the State v. Powell crime can reasonably be made, our inquiry stops. State v. Boyd, 2001 UT 30, ¶ 16, 25 P.3d 985. ¶3 Powell argues that the evidence was insufficient to convict him on the aggravated robbery charge because the evidence did not establish that he used a dangerous weapon. Although he concedes that a knife was present, he contends that use requires a more active employment of the knife than merely having it in his hand. However, it is well established that the use of a dangerous weapon does not require an affirmative act of, for example, pointing or jabbing at a victim. State v. Graham, 2011 UT App 332, ¶ 29, 263 P.3d 569. [A] defendant uses a dangerous weapon when he or she exhibits the weapon for the purpose of creating fear in the victim. State v. Weisberg, 2002 UT App 434, ¶ 19, 62 P.3d 457 (citation omitted). Here, Powell approached the victim with his face concealed and a knife open and visible in his hand and told the victim to give him her purse. It is reasonable to infer from these facts that the knife was present and displayed with the intent to cause fear in the victim. Accordingly, the jury had sufficient evidence to convict Powell of aggravated robbery. ¶4 Powell also asserts that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of criminal trespass because the evidence was inconclusive regarding whether he fully entered the apartment to which he fled after the robbery. However, the apartment occupant testified that Powell rushed in and that the occupant s father in law was able to grab him and then push him back outside. This testimony is sufficient for the jury to find that Powell was inside the apartment, even if only briefly. Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for criminal trespass. ¶5 Affirmed. ____________________ 20110797 CA 2 2013 UT App 64
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
