Salt Lake City v. Karmazsin

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)

Salt Lake City,
Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Alexander J. Karmazsin,
Defendant and Appellant.

Case No. 981569-CA

F I L E D
(November 5, 1998)

-----

Third District, Salt Lake Department
The Honorable William W. Barrett

Attorneys:
Benjamin A. Hamilton, Salt Lake City, for Appellant
Richard W. Daynes, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

-----

Before Judges Wilkins, Jackson, and Orme.

PER CURIAM:

According to Utah R. Crim. P. 12(b), any defenses or objections to an information must be made prior to trial. Even if we accept Karmazsin's argument that he did not receive a copy of the information until just before trial, he waited too long to object. He should have objected immediately upon noticing the alleged defect, which could readily have been corrected, but instead allowed the State to call a witness, conceded that the State could prove the merits of the charged offense, called no witnesses on his behalf, and then made his argument. By then, Karmazsin had waived his opportunity to object to the appropriateness of a stamped signature on the information.

Karmazsin's conviction is affirmed.
 

______________________________
Michael J. Wilkins, Associate Presiding Judge
 

______________________________
Norman H. Jackson, Judge
 

______________________________
Gregory K. Orme, Judge