State v. Ray

Summary

The Utah Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and reinstated Ray’s forcible-sexual-abuse conviction, holding that trial counsel was not constitutionally deficient for failing to object to an undefined “indecent liberties” term in the jury instruction. Although the trial court should have defined the term, counsel’s decision was objectively reasonable under the circumstances because the State focused on the specific-touching variant and the definition was not central to Ray’s defense. The court remanded to the court of appeals to address Ray’s remaining claims.