State v. Buranek
Docket Number | 20230969-CA |
Decision Date | 20 June 2025 |
Citation | State v. Buranek, 2025 UT App 92, 20230969-CA (Utah App. Jun 20, 2025) |
Parties | State of Utah, Appellee, v. Luke Martin Buranek, Appellant. |
Court | Utah Court of Appeals |
Second District Court, Ogden DepartmentNo. 221901265, The Honorable Craig Hall The Honorable Rita M. Cornish.
Rachel Phillips Ainscough and Jessica Hyde Holzer, Attorneys for Appellant.
Derek E. Brown and Alexandra Herlong, Attorneys for Appellee.
OPINION
¶1 Over the course of one night, Luke Martin Buranek engaged in a sexually explicit online conversation and ultimately tried to meet up to have sex with a "13-year old girl" who turned out to be an undercover special agent.A jury subsequently convicted him of enticing a minor.Buranek now challenges his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict on the ground that the State had failed to prove that he was not entrapped.We affirm his conviction.
BACKGROUND[1]
¶2 In May 2022, having recently broken up with his girlfriend Buranek posted an ad on a dating and personals website.The website required its users to be 18 years or older.Buranek's listing specified that he, a 19-year-old male was seeking a "fwb situation"[2] and "connections" with women aged 18 to 35.The ad also included a picture of Buranek with blue hair.
¶3 The ad caught the attention of a special agent (Agent) for Utah's Internet Crimes Against Children Taskforce.Posing as a girl named Cassidy,[3] Agent responded to Buranek, leading to the following email exchange:
Cassidy: I love the hair.You look like just my type. we should hang out Buranek: I'm willing. if I may ask what do you look like?Cassidy: I can send you a pic.I am a little young tho.I hope that is ok.
Agent then sent Buranek a photo of a girl whom Agent believed appeared to be around 13 years old but which was actually a photo of a legal secretary in Agent's office-sent with her consent-that was taken when she was between 15 and 17 years old.
¶4 The email exchange then continued:
Buranek then asked whether Cassidy was on a certain messaging app, and the two exchanged a few more emails coordinating the switch to that other platform.Cassidy also sent Buranek two more photos that she said were of herself.
¶5 Once they had connected on the messaging app, Buranek sent a photo of himself, and their conversation continued:
¶6 Cassidy then asked Buranek to expand on "what kind of pleasure you can show me," to which he replied that he"could tease,""finger," or "please" her in whatever manner she felt "comfortable," and he assured her that he was not a "jerk."Cassidy then asked whether they"[c]ould go further" if she wanted and stated that Buranek seemed "so sweet and caring."Buranek answered, He also told her that he was "bigger than average."Cassidy then asked, This prompted discussion of possibly exchanging nude photos, but they ultimately decided against it.
¶7 Their conversation then continued:
¶8 Buranek next wanted "reassurance that you are you" and asked Cassidy for more photos of her.Cassidy replied that she did not "feel comfortable sending any more" photos, but Buranek tried to convince her to do so anyway.After some back and forth, Cassidy suggested that they meet at a park near her house to ease his concerns and indicated that they could then go to her house if he wished.Buranek replied, When Buranek returned to the conversation after showering, he and Cassidy proceeded to coordinate meeting at the park.
¶9 After Buranek estimated that he could be there by 8:30 p.m., Cassidy clarified, "I just want to make sure your cool coming and meeting up with me to have sex and show me my first time" and asked, "You're still ok with meeting me even though I'm 13 and inexperienced at sex?"Buranek answered, Following additional coordination about their meet-up, which included Cassidy telling Buranek that her mother was out of town for the night and Buranek sending Cassidy a picture of his truck, Buranek left and drove some 40 minutes to meet her at the park.
¶10 Law enforcement officers arrested Buranek soon after his arrival at the park.He was charged with one count of enticing a minor, a second-degree felony.Buranek moved to have the charge dismissed on entrapment grounds.Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that Agent's conduct did not constitute entrapment as a matter of law and denied the motion.
¶11The case then proceeded to a two-day jury trial.[4] Agent was the only witness to testify for the State.Agent testified that he chose to respond to Buranek's ad because Buranek's "hair was something [Agent] could bring up in a conversation to chat with him about" and because the listing appeared to be "more sexual in nature."Agent stated that it is best practice for agents to state their undercover persona's age early in the conversation to not waste time with individuals who "cut bait and leave" after learning they are supposedly conversing with a minor.He indicated that it is also best practice to allow the other person to be the first to bring up sexual acts.Agent then testified about Cassidy's communications with Buranek, and the messages they exchanged were introduced into evidence.
¶12 Following Agent's testimony and the close of the State's evidence, Buranek moved for a directed verdict.He argued that the State had not met its burden of establishing that he was not entrapped.He noted that the website on which he posted his ad was "an adults only site," that the ad did not indicate that he sought to engage in "any sort of illegal activity," that Agent was the one to initiate contact with him, and that Agent engaged in "very persistent questioning" after Agent "had suggested sex."The State responded that entrapment had already "been litigated heavily prior to trial."The State also argued that entrapment focuses on the officer's actions and stated, "[T]he only evidence that we have right now up to this point is that [Agent] followed best practices in this conversation."The State further noted that Buranek had been repeatedly reminded that Cassidy was 13 years old, but he nonetheless discussed sexual acts with her.
¶13 After commenting that "this is one of the closer cases,"the trial court concluded that the State had presented sufficient evidence upon which a jury might reasonably base a finding that Buranek was not entrapped.The court stated that although there was "some emotional component to the conversation," an emotional plea "has to be . . . pretty significant" to amount to entrapment as a matter of law.Accordingly, the court denied the motion for a directed verdict.
¶14 In presenting his case, Buranek again raised entrapment as a defense.He called an expert witness, a former assistant U.S Attorney and FBI agent,...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
