State v. Yoder

Citation935 P.2d 534
Decision Date20 March 1997
Docket NumberNo. 950568-CA,950568-CA
Parties313 Utah Adv. Rep. 5 STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Michael W. YODER, Defendant and Appellant.
CourtCourt of Appeals of Utah

Linda M. Jones, Lisa J. Remal, and Richard P. Mauro, Salt Lake City, for Defendant and Appellant.

Jan Graham and Kenneth A. Bronston, Salt Lake City, for Plaintiff and Appellee.

Before GREENWOOD, JACKSON and ORME, JJ.

JACKSON, Judge:

Defendant Michael W. Yoder appeals his convictions for child kidnaping, a first degree felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-301.1 (1995), and aggravated sexual abuse of a child, a first degree felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-404.1 (1995). We affirm.

FACTS 1

On October 21, 1993, around 6:30 p.m. at a West Valley City apartment complex, five-year-old S.F. left her apartment to take some trash to a dumpster about thirty feet from her apartment door. When S.F. failed to return after a few minutes, her mother began searching for her and then called the police to report that she was missing. About one-half hour later, Officer Robert Idle of the West Valley City Police Department arrived at the apartment complex to investigate S.F.'s disappearance.

Officer Idle first met with S.F.'s mother and conducted a preliminary search of the family's apartment and other nearby places where S.F. may have wandered. When this preliminary search uncovered nothing, Idle began a door-to-door search of building I, the building in which S.F. lived, and a search of the perimeter of the apartment complex, followed by a general search from building to building. Two other officers and about fifteen residents of the complex assisted Idle in this search.

Within the next several hours, the search was joined by all detectives of the West Valley City Police Department and numerous agents of the Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County Police Departments, and all the surrounding areas of the complex were searched. During this period, a crowd also gathered at the complex.

About three hours after S.F. had first disappeared, S.F.'s clothes were found in an area that had already been searched by the police. The clothes were located between a sidewalk and a small pond, about twenty feet from building K, the building in which defendant lived. There were no reports indicating how or by whom the clothes had been placed or thrown there.

The officers first searched the pond but found nothing. They then turned to building K, as this building was closest to where the clothes were found. Building K has six apartments with balconies facing the area where the clothes were found, with two apartments on each of the building's three floors. Lights were on in only two of these apartments, one of which was defendant's second floor apartment.

A number of unidentified people reported to the police that they had seen defendant "acting suspicious," going back and forth numerous times between his apartment and his balcony and the balcony closet, and standing on the balcony watching the crowd below. A few of the officers also saw defendant both standing on his balcony and going back and forth between his apartment and his balcony.

The police decided to check all the apartments in building K. Detective Alan Call and Officer John Pearce were told to search the building, starting with defendant's apartment. They were instructed to ask defendant if he had seen anything concerning the clothes and to seek his consent to search his apartment.

Thus, the two officers, followed shortly thereafter by Detective Vince Garcia, went to defendant's apartment and asked defendant if they could enter his apartment, explaining that they were looking for a five-year-old girl. Defendant opened the door and stepped back, allowing the officers to enter six-to-eight feet inside the apartment. The officers asked defendant if he knew anything about a missing five-year-old girl. In response to the officers' inquiry about S.F. and their questions as to whether he had seen anything, defendant claimed to have been sleeping and to have just awakened. The officers observed that defendant appeared unusually nervous and agitated.

The officers then explained to defendant that the child had been missing for several hours, that her clothes had been discovered near his apartment building, and that they would like to look at his balcony to see if there might be other items there. Defendant refused to allow the officers to search his apartment or balcony. The officers further explained the urgency of finding a small girl who was probably without clothing, again asking for defendant's cooperation. Defendant again refused to allow them to search and told them they would need a warrant if they wanted to search his apartment. Defendant also asked the officers to leave his apartment, but they refused.

Within five to fifteen minutes after the officers had arrived, defendant said he would not cooperate with the West Valley police because of some prior incident, but said he would cooperate with the Salt Lake County Sheriff. Accordingly, Officer Pearce left the apartment to communicate this to the officer in charge. Meanwhile, the officers who stayed in the apartment continued to "explain the urgency of their inquiry" and to "plead or request that [they] be allowed to find the child." Again, defendant refused to allow a search of his apartment and insisted that the officers leave.

A few minutes later, Officer Pearce returned to defendant's apartment with Salt Lake County Deputy Sheriff Kenneth Eyre. Deputy Eyre introduced himself to defendant and explained that the officers were not there to search for drugs or weapons or anything of that nature, but that they were just trying to find a little girl to make sure that she was all right. Eyre said to defendant, "As a possible father or brother ... wouldn't you want to help somebody find their little girl?" Defendant answered, "No," a response Eyre found odd "considering the circumstances."

In the course of the officers' requests to search the apartment, defendant vacillated back and forth four or five times, indicating at times that he would be cooperative and then refusing to cooperate. At one point after Deputy Eyre's arrival, defendant said he was going to call his attorney. He instead called 911, telling the dispatcher that there were four trespassers--three West Valley City police officers and a Salt Lake County deputy--in his apartment, and asking that they be removed. The dispatcher recommended that he cooperate with the officers.

Deputy Eyre then drew defendant aside and suggested that just he and defendant go out and search the balcony, without the West Once on the balcony, defendant went directly to the balcony closet. Defendant briefly opened the closet door about three or four inches and then shut it, saying something to the effect of, "See, there's nothing out here." Deputy Eyre made a cursory search of the rest of the balcony, and then asked that defendant go back into the apartment before him. Defendant at first refused, but then went ahead. As soon as defendant reached the sliding glass door, Eyre turned to the closet and opened the closet door. There he saw S.F. huddled in a box and covered by a blanket. She did not move, and Eyre believed at first that she was dead.

Valley officers being involved. Defendant agreed, but said he wanted the West Valley officers to leave. The West Valley officers retreated to the apartment's doorway where they could see Eyre to ensure his safety. Defendant then led Eyre out onto the balcony.

Deputy Eyre immediately arrested defendant, pushing him back into the apartment and handcuffing him. Defendant at this point made a number of comments, including: "You know why I couldn't let you look, because she was here"; "I didn't hurt that little girl very bad"; and, "Just shoot me now, I'm sick." At this same time, other officers entered the apartment to remove S.F. from the closet. They found that she was naked and bound with tape in a fetal position.

Later, it was learned that while the police had searched for S.F., defendant had, over a period of about four hours, removed his clothes and stripped S.F. naked; bound her from head to foot with tape; held her upside down by her feet and flushed her head in the toilet; slapped her; penetrated her anus and vagina with a blunt object, forcefully enough to cause extensive bruising; and forced her to touch his own penis and buttocks with her mouth. In addition, defendant threatened to kill S.F., her mother, and her mother's unborn child if S.F. was not quiet.

Defendant was subsequently charged with child kidnaping and aggravated sexual abuse of a child. Defendant filed a motion to suppress all evidence gathered by the police in the warrantless search of his balcony and a motion to suppress incriminating statements made to police at his apartment after his arrest and statements made to Officer Idle while being transported from the police station to jail. The trial court denied defendant's motions, concluding that defendant consented to the warrantless search of his balcony and that the search was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances. The court also found that defendant's incriminating statements made to Officer Idle were admissible because they were not the result of custodial interrogation.

Defendant entered a plea of "guilty and mentally ill," conditioned on his ability to appeal the trial court's denial of his motions to suppress. He was then referred to the Utah State Hospital for mental evaluations. Following the sentencing hearing, and after having reviewed the evaluations of defendant's mental status, the trial court found that defendant was not "mentally ill" as defined by Utah law and thus did not qualify for "guilty and mentally ill" status. The trial court sentenced defendant to serve concurrent terms of fifteen-years-to-life for the child kidnaping offense and nine-years-to-life for the aggravated...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • State v. Low
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • August 22, 2008
    ...and actions were "words or actions [Officer King] should have known were reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from [Low]." Id. ¶ 72 The facts of this case present a very close question. We agree with the State that many of Low's statements were voluntary statements that do ......
  • People v. Richardson, 1-04-3686.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 21, 2007
    ...at 2386, 115 L.Ed.2d at 398; Royer, 460 U.S. at 497, 103 S.Ct. at 1324, 75 L.Ed.2d at 236 (quoted above). See also State v. Yoder, 935 P.2d 534, 542 (Utah App.1997) (defendant's "uncooperative, false and evasive" responses taken in to account); State v. Nguyen, 878 P.2d 1183, 1187 (Utah App......
  • State v. Comer
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • June 27, 2002
    ...entry into the Comers' home was lawful because it was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances.8 See State v. Yoder, 935 P.2d 534, 540 (Utah Ct.App. 1997). With few exceptions,9 probable cause is the primary prerequisite to any police search of a residence. "Probable cause exis......
  • State v. Alverez
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • March 24, 2005
    ...omitted). "In general, probable cause means a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found." State v. Yoder, 935 P.2d 534, 540 (Utah Ct.App.1997) (quotations and citation omitted). "The probable cause determination is based on the totality of the circumstances." Id.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA General Library Street Legal. A Guide to Pre-trial Criminal Procedure for Police, Prosecutors, and Defenders
    • January 1, 2007
    ...42 (1982) 122 376 STREET LEGAL: A GUIDE TO PRE-TRIAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85 (1979) 7, 197 Yoder, State v., 935 P.2d 534 (Utah App. 1997) 166 Young, State v., 39 P.3d 651 (Idaho App. 2002) 193, 195 Young, United States v., 105 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1997) 66 Young, Unit......
  • Chapter 6. Search and Seizure
    • United States
    • ABA General Library Street Legal. A Guide to Pre-trial Criminal Procedure for Police, Prosecutors, and Defenders
    • January 1, 2007
    ...apartment, searched, and found the missing five-year-old girl, who had been sexually assaulted and was tightly bound. State v. Yoder, 935 P.2d 534 (Utah App. 1997). Other examples where courts have found that exigent circumstances justify warrantless entry include to investigate reports of ......
  • Trying Your Case to Win on Appeal
    • United States
    • Utah State Bar Utah Bar Journal No. 11-10, December 1998
    • Invalid date
    ...raised in answer and mentioned at hearing, when party failed to provide trial court with any legal authority). See also State v. Yoder, 935 P.2d 534, 543 n.6 (Utah Ct. App. 1997) (declining to address state constitutional argument). Rather, a party must satisfy three requirements: (1) the i......

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