State v. Olsen

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
 

----ooOoo----

State of Utah,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Michael Lee Olsen,

Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20020723-CA
 

F I L E D
(April 14, 2005)
 

2005 UT App 173

-----

Fourth District, Provo Department

The Honorable Fred D. Howard

Attorneys: Margaret P. Lindsay, Orem, for Appellant

Mark L. Shurtleff and Laura B. Dupaix, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

-----

Before Judges Davis, Jackson, and Thorne.

PER CURIAM:

    This case is before the court on Appellant Michael Lee Olsen's motion for summary disposition on the basis that the issues presented on appeal are so insubstantial as to not merit further consideration by the court. See Utah R. App. P. 10. Specifically, Olsen contends that the two issues on appeal have been rendered moot. The State submitted a letter agreeing with Olsen's motion.

    Olsen was charged with Aggravated Assault in district court case number 001402247. The State sought to amend the information to add a charge of Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person based on conduct occurring at the same time. The trial court refused to allow the amendment. The State filed a separate information charging Olsen with Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person in district court case number 021401036. Olsen entered a Sery plea to Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person, reserving his right to appeal two motions to dismiss he filed in district court.

    One motion was based on rule 4(d) of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure, which requires that all offenses occurring in one episode be charged in one information. See Utah R. App. P. 4(d). In the second motion Olsen argued that Utah Code section 76-10-503, See Utah Code Ann. § 76-10-503 (2003), the statute prohibiting Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person, is unconstitutional on its face because it violates Article I, Section 6 of the Utah Constitution, the right to bear arms. See Utah Cons. Art. I, §6.

    Olsen requested that this court stay proceedings until the Utah Supreme Court issued an opinion in State v. Willis, 2004 UT 93, 100 P.3d 1218, a pending case arguing the exact constitutional issue raised in this appeal regarding Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person. The supreme court has since issued an opinion concluding that the Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person statute does not violate the Utah Constitution. See id. The issue has, therefore, been decided.

    Subsequent events have also rendered moot Olsen's claim that both charges must be filed in one information. The district court dismissed the criminal case charging Olsen with Aggravated Assault based on Olsen's plea of guilty to the offense of Possession of a Weapon by a Restricted Person. This effectively granted Olsen the relief he seeks.

    As a result, Olsen is correct that the issues he asserts on appeal have been rendered moot. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

______________________________

James Z. Davis, Judge

______________________________

Norman H. Jackson, Judge

______________________________

William A. Thorne Jr., Judge