The County Attorney's Office plays an important role in protecting our community, supporting victims of crime, upholding the law, and providing legal guidance to county government. The decisions made by this office affect the lives, safety, and rights of Wasatch County residents.
My campaign is focused on strengthening the office, improving victim advocacy, ensuring accountability in criminal prosecutions, and providing thoughtful, independent legal leadership.
As an attorney who has spent my career representing individuals and families in our community, I have seen firsthand how legal decisions affect people's lives. I believe there are opportunities to improve how the County Attorney's Office serves our residents, and I am committed to pursuing those improvements.
I also believe voters deserve to understand how I approach the responsibilities of this position, the legal principles that guide my decisions, and the experience I would bring to the office.
Below, I explain my positions on several important issues, including criminal prosecution, prosecutorial discretion, victim advocacy, professional qualifications, and independent leadership.
One of my priorities is ensuring that victims of crime receive meaningful assistance, protection, and support throughout the criminal justice process.
Utah law provides mechanisms for protecting victims through criminal protective orders. Under Utah Code § 78B-7-803, a court may issue a pretrial protective order in a criminal case. Sections 78B-7-804 and 78B-7-805 provide for protective orders in connection with sentencing and, where authorized, continuing protection.
The County Attorney's Office can seek appropriate protective conditions during criminal proceedings. These protections can be particularly important when victims are afraid of retaliation, intimidation, or further harm.
In addition, victim advocates can provide nonlegal assistance to individuals seeking civil protective orders. Utah Code § 77-38-403 broadly defines advocacy services to include assistance connecting victims with appropriate resources and services. Section 78B-7-105 also addresses clerical assistance with protective order petitions.
A victim advocate can help victims understand the process, locate appropriate forms, access available resources, and navigate the court system without undertaking legal representation.
My position is that protecting and supporting victims is an essential part of an effective criminal justice system.
Victims should feel safe, informed, and supported throughout the process. When victims trust the system and feel comfortable participating, that benefits both the individual victim and the administration of justice.
Providing meaningful victim advocacy does not require representing victims as their personal attorneys. It requires recognizing that the people affected by crime deserve care, dignity, and attention.
The County Attorney's Office has had one full-time victim advocate and added a part-time Spanish-speaking advocate this year.
I welcome that addition. Expanding victim advocacy resources is a positive step.
However, the addition of a part-time position does not resolve my broader concern about whether the office has sufficient resources to meet the needs of our growing community.
Wasatch County has experienced substantial population growth. As the community grows, the demand for victim services should be evaluated accordingly.
Victim advocates help people navigate some of the most difficult experiences of their lives. Their responsibilities may include crisis support, court preparation, communication, referrals, and assistance understanding the criminal justice process.
These services take time, attention, and compassion.
My position is that additional advocates are needed, we need to provide adequate resources to those already serving, and ensure that victims receive timely and meaningful assistance.
We should take good care of our victim advocates so they can take good care of our victims.
I applaud the advocates currently working in the office. I recognize the importance of their work and the need to support it.
Probable cause is necessary to support criminal charges, and the prosecution must prove every element of a charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt to obtain a conviction at trial.
I believe that when the facts and reliable evidence support the elements of a criminal offense, prosecutors should file the appropriate charges, subject to legitimate considerations of prosecutorial discretion.
By the time a case is submitted for screening, law enforcement has generally conducted an investigation and gathered evidence. The prosecutor must evaluate that evidence, including witness statements, photographs, recordings, physical evidence, investigative reports, and any evidence that may undermine the allegations.
A prosecutor must assess the applicable law, the admissibility and reliability of evidence, the likelihood of proving the case, and the interests of justice.
When additional investigation is reasonably necessary, prosecutors should work with law enforcement to identify and pursue relevant evidence.
Serious cases deserve thorough investigations, careful legal analysis, and charging decisions that fully account for the available evidence.
Prosecutors should not overlook reliable evidence, prematurely abandon reasonable investigative avenues, or decline appropriate charges without a sound legal and factual basis.
Criminal charges should reflect the evidence, the seriousness of the conduct, and the requirements of the law.
Prosecutorial discretion is an essential part of the criminal justice system.
Prosecutors must exercise judgment when determining whether to file charges, which offenses are supported by the evidence, how to resolve cases, and whether alternatives to incarceration are appropriate.
For example, if the evidence does not establish a required element of a criminal offense, charges should not be filed. If a conflict of interest prevents an impartial charging decision, appropriate steps should be taken to address that conflict, including referral to an independent prosecuting authority when warranted.
There are also circumstances in which the evidence may support charges, but other legitimate considerations influence the appropriate exercise of discretion.
What I oppose is the misuse of prosecutorial discretion.
Discretion should be exercised thoughtfully, consistently, and in the interests of justice. It should not become an excuse to disregard serious misconduct or avoid difficult cases.
My goal is an office that evaluates cases fairly, takes crimes against individuals seriously, and makes charging decisions based on the law, the evidence, and legitimate prosecutorial considerations.
Prosecutors and juries have distinct responsibilities within the criminal justice system.
A prosecutor reviews evidence, makes appropriate charging decisions, and presents the State's case. In a jury trial, the jury determines the facts and whether the prosecution has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Many criminal cases are appropriately resolved through negotiated plea agreements. Plea bargaining is an important part of the criminal justice system, and a fair resolution can benefit victims, defendants, and the community.
However, prosecutors must also be prepared to take cases to trial.
Trial preparation strengthens a prosecutor's ability to evaluate evidence, identify weaknesses, negotiate appropriate resolutions, and present a case effectively when necessary.
My experience includes substantial litigation and trial work. I understand the importance of preparation, evidentiary rules, witness examination, and persuasive courtroom advocacy.
As County Attorney, I would expect the prosecutors in my office to be prepared, capable, and willing to try cases as necessary.
A prosecutor should be willing to negotiate a fair resolution, but also prepared to prove the case in court.
I believe serious criminal cases, particularly those involving the loss of human life, deserve thorough investigations, careful evaluation of the evidence, and independent charging decisions.
The Patrick Hayes shooting is an example of a case in which I have publicly questioned whether the evidence and investigative concerns received sufficient consideration by the County Attorney's Office.
My concerns are based on my review of the available evidence, including video of the confrontation, and the findings of the investigation of Sheriff Jared Rigby conducted by retired Judge Richard McKelvie.
The video is significant evidence that warrants careful evaluation. In my opinion, the circumstances surrounding the confrontation and shooting support the filing of homicide charges, and I believe I could meet the standard of proving the elements beyond a reasonable doubt. Even though the defendant may claim self-defense, I don’t believe many of the statements made by the defendant, and I disagree that it was self-defense based upon what I reviewed, and therefore, a claim of self-defense should ultimately be resolved by a jury. There are cases of grave importance for the public, such as this one, that merit the trier of fact’s involvement to resolve what happened. The victim deserves that, and the victim’s family deserves that.
The McKelvie investigation raised concerns about the handling of the Sheriff's Office investigation.[1]
Public reporting on that investigation describes interference with investigative decisions, concerns expressed by assigned investigators, and disagreement among law enforcement officials about the appropriate charging decision.
I recognize that the current County Attorney's Office has defended its charging decision and has stated that outside prosecuting agencies were consulted.
However, I believe the public deserves greater clarity about the scope of those reviews, what evidence was considered, and how the concerns raised in the McKelvie investigation were addressed. The County Attorney’s public statement about it’s charging decision stated “while additional facts could come to light that would change this analysis, considering our confidence in the thoroughness of the investigation that was performed, that is not likely.” [2]
If the McKelvie Report explained that the investigation was not handled properly, why would the County Attorney’s office be confident in relying on that investigation?
I believe an independent and thorough review of the available evidence and investigative decisions is warranted.
A man's life was taken. The seriousness of that loss demands careful investigation, sound legal analysis, and willingness to reconsider
Accountability means ensuring that serious cases receive the careful, independent review they deserve, regardless of who is involved.
I meet the statutory qualifications to serve as Wasatch County Attorney under Utah Code § 17-68-202.
Utah law requires a County Attorney candidate to be a licensed Utah attorney, an active member of the Utah State Bar in good standing, and to satisfy the applicable citizenship, voter registration, and residency requirements.
My legal experience includes criminal litigation, civil litigation, juvenile court proceedings, administrative matters, and transactional work.
I regularly work with individuals, families, government agencies, and victims of crime. I have represented clients in complex disputes, handled contested hearings, worked through trial and appellate proceedings, and served as a court-appointed guardian ad litem representing children's interests.
These experiences provide an understanding of how legal decisions affect the people who must live with their consequences.
The County Attorney is responsible not only for criminal prosecution but also for providing legal guidance to county government, addressing civil matters, supervising attorneys and staff, and managing the office.
That requires broad legal knowledge, sound judgment, management skills, and the ability to evaluate complex legal issues.
Former Wasatch County Attorney and retired Judge Steven Hansen also entered the County Attorney's Office with a background in private practice. His career illustrates that experience in private practice can be lead to relevant and successful public legal service.
My experience practicing Utah law, representing local residents, litigating contested matters, and working across multiple legal disciplines has prepared me to fulfill the responsibilities of the office.
The County Attorney must work effectively with the Sheriff's Office, county government, law enforcement agencies, courts, and community organizations. Strong professional relationships are essential to carrying out those responsibilities.
However, cooperation should never compromise independent legal judgment.
I have no political allegiances and owe no one political favors. That commitment concerns independence, not cooperation.
The County Attorney must be willing to provide candid legal advice, identify improper conduct, address conflicts of interest, and make difficult decisions even when those decisions are unpopular with colleagues or other officials.
Throughout my career, I have worked with government agencies, schools, attorneys, courts, and community organizations. I am also trained in mediation and collaborative practice and regularly resolve disputes through negotiation.
I value professionalism, mutual respect, trust, and teamwork. I am personable, easy to talk to, and work well with others.
I believe the County Attorney can maintain strong working relationships while remaining independent, impartial, and accountable to the law and the people of Wasatch County.
That is the kind of leadership I would bring to the office.
For the past 12 years, Wasatch County voters have not had another candidate's name listed on the general election ballot for County Attorney.
Although other individuals have sought the position through Republican conventions or primary elections, those candidates did not advance to the general election ballot. In 2018, a write-in candidate also sought the office, but that candidate's name was not printed on the ballot.
I believe all registered voters of all political affiliations deserve an opportunity to choose between candidates in the general election.
Competitive elections provide an opportunity to discuss the responsibilities of public office, evaluate performance, consider new ideas, and hold elected officials accountable.
I am running because I believe the County Attorney's Office can improve, and because I want every voter in Wasatch County to have a meaningful choice about who leads this important office.
Elections should provide voters with an opportunity to evaluate different qualifications, perspectives, and approaches to public service.
My campaign is about identifying opportunities to improve the County Attorney's Office and proposing ways to better serve our community.
I believe public officials should welcome constructive criticism, thoughtful discussion, and new ideas. Our government works best when its leaders remain accountable, responsive, and willing to improve.
I welcome questions about my experience, my positions, and my proposals. I encourage residents to consider the applicable law, examine the evidence, and contact me directly if they would like to discuss any of these issues.
Our community deserves an effective, accountable County Attorney's Office that takes crime seriously, supports victims, protects constitutional rights, and serves the people with care and dignity.