State v. Gordon, 2004 UT 2 (Utah 1/16/2004), 20020332.

Decision Date16 January 2004
Docket NumberNo. 20020332.,20020332.
Citation2004 UT 2
PartiesState of Utah, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Adrian Whitfield Gordon, Defendant and Appellant.
CourtUtah Supreme Court

Mark L. Shurtleff, Att'y Gen., J. Frederic Voros, Jr., Jeanne B. Inouye, Asst. Att'ys Gen., Byron F. Burmester, J. Kevin Murphy, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff.

Linda M. Jones, Michael A. Peterson, Salt Lake City, for defendant

WILKINS, Justice:

¶ 1 Defendant Adrian Gordon appeals his conviction for murder. Gordon argues the evidence presented at his bench trial was insufficient to support the verdict. We affirm.

BACKGROUND1

¶ 2 Gordon was convicted of murdering Lee Lundskog. Lundskog died in the early morning of September 29, 2001 outside a 7-Eleven store in Salt Lake County as a result of numerous blows to the head. Gustavo Diaz-Hernandez, a witness to the incident, saw Lundskog's attacker repeatedly kicking Lundskog. The evidence of homicide was substantial enough that the only issue at trial was the identity of the attacker.

¶ 3 According to the unchallenged facts, Gordon was at the 7-Eleven near the time of the murder wearing a light-colored shirt. Robert Mellen, a regular customer at the 7-Eleven, saw Gordon wave at Lundskog as if to beckon him. Diaz-Hernandez, whose eyesight was quite good, witnessed the attack on Lundskog while waiting for a ride to work and immediately reported it to the person driving him to work. Police later seized a light-colored T-shirt from a place where Gordon was living.

¶ 4 In the announcement of its verdict, the trial court discussed numerous other facts. Gordon challenges many of the trial court's statements regarding the evidence by placing the trial court's statements into three categories: those unsupported by the evidence, improper and irrelevant inferences, and statements that are inconsistent with the evidence. Gordon asserts that the trial court's unsupported, improper, and inconsistent statements, all of which he refers to generically as "findings," must be stricken, leaving a conviction unsupported by sufficient evidence.

ANALYSIS
I. STANDARD OF REVIEW

¶ 5 "When reviewing a bench trial for sufficiency of the evidence, we must sustain the trial court's judgment unless it is 'against the clear weight of the evidence, or if [we] otherwise reach[] a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.'" State v. Goodman, 763 P.2d 786, 786-87 (Utah 1988) (quoting State v. Walker, 743 P.2d 191, 193 (Utah 1987)).

II. SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

¶ 6 As noted above, in evaluating Gordon's insufficiency of the evidence claim we must determine whether the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence presented at trial. Although we do not discuss each and every fact presented at trial, the trial record provides ample evidence to support the facts discussed below.

¶ 7 Robert Mellen, a frequent customer of the 7-Eleven store where Lundskog was killed, testified at trial concerning his observations at the 7-Eleven on the morning of Lundskog's murder. Mellen arrived at the 7-Eleven shortly after 5:20 a.m. Mellen identified Gordon as being at the store that morning. Upon leaving the 7-Eleven, Mellen returned to his truck in front of the store. According to a surveillance video from inside the 7-Eleven, Gordon exited the store on foot at 5:25:56 a.m. and headed north. While Mellen was backing his truck away from the store about ten seconds later he saw Gordon, whom he identified in a photo line-up, "waving [Lundskog] . . . to come over and talk to him." At 5:27:21, barely a minute after Gordon's gesture to Lundskog, the store's surveillance camera shows Lundskog walking north in front of the 7-Eleven — the direction of Gordon's travel. This is the last time Lundskog appears on the surveillance tape. Lundskog's body was later found just behind the 7-Eleven, near the northwest corner of the building.

¶ 8 Another witness at trial, Gustavo Diaz-Hernandez, witnessed at least a portion of the attack on Lundskog. He testified that he was walking by the 7-Eleven when he heard noises that he eventually determined came from one person kicking another. Diaz-Hernandez observed the attack from various vantage points and distances. He watched the attacker repeatedly kick Lundskog before ceasing the attack and entering the 7-Eleven store from the front. The front of the store was well-lit. According to Diaz-Hernandez, the attacker was a muscular African-American man with short hair wearing a loose T-shirt, baggy shorts, and white tennis shoes. Diaz-Hernandez's description of the attacker's clothing matched Mellen's description of Gordon.

¶ 9 Diaz-Hernandez continued observing the attacker, who left the 7-Eleven store when another car pulled up. The attacker went to that car, put some bags inside, returned to Lundskog and kicked him again, and then walked away from the area alongside the car. Diaz-Hernandez's observations of the attacker match quite well with Gordon's actions as recorded on videotape by the store's surveillance camera.

¶ 10 Gordon first appeared on the store's video at 5:20:50 a.m. when he entered the store from the north. While in the store, Gordon used the telephone before briefly departing to the north, passing Lundskog in the doorway. Gordon then reentered the store at 5:25:45 a.m. before again departing and heading north barely fifteen seconds later....

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Gordon v. State
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • September 1, 2016
    ...the verdict. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, concluding that “[a]mple evidence supports Gordon's conviction.” State v. Gordon , 2004 UT 2, ¶¶ 1, 14, 84 P.3d 1167.¶4 Thereafter, Gordon arranged for new counsel, who began collecting documents related to his case. On October 13......
  • Gordon v. State
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • January 30, 2017
    ...verdict. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, concluding that "[a]mple evidence supports Gordon's conviction." State v. Gordon, 2004 UT 2, ¶¶ 1, 14, 84 P.3d 1167.¶ 4 Thereafter, Gordon arranged for new counsel, who began collecting documents related to his case. On October 13, 20......
  • State v. Briggs
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • October 31, 2008
    ...the clear weight of the evidence, or if [we] otherwise reach[ ] a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.'" State v. Gordon, 2004 UT 2, ¶ 5, 84 P.3d 1167 (quoting State v. Goodman, 763 P.2d 786, 786-87 (Utah 1988) (quoting State v. Walker, 743 P.2d 191, 193 (Utah ¶ 11 Add......
  • State v. Bingham
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • April 23, 2015
    ...the clear weight of the evidence, or if [we] otherwise reach[ ] a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” State v. Gordon, 2004 UT 2, ¶ 5, 84 P.3d 1167 (alterations in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Thus, when “reviewing a bench trial for suff......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Utah Standards of Appellate Review - Third Edition
    • United States
    • Utah State Bar Utah Bar Journal No. 23-4, August 2010
    • Invalid date
    ...with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. See State v. Keener 2008 UT App 288, ¶11, 191 P.3d 835; State v.Gordon, 2004 UT 2, ¶5, 84 P.3d 1167; State v. Greuber, 2007UT 50, ¶8, 165 P.3d 1185 (reviewing court must rule clear error if factual findings are not adequately......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT