High Court Ruling Keeps Jury Selection for Richins Murder Trial Local

As the Kouri Richins murder case is on hold while defendants are preparing to appeal a decision against moving the trial to Salt Lake County, two Utah Supreme Court rulings concerning the case have been published.

Attorneys in the case already relied on both rulings, which were disclosed to them earlier, in hearings as the case moved toward a trial previously scheduled to begin at the end of this month.

One decision denies a motion by Richins and her attorneys to expand the jury pool to Salt Lake County residents. Richins, from Kamas, is accused of killing her husband, 39-year-old Eric Richins, in 2022 by secretly giving him a fatal dose of drugs.

The Utah Supreme Court denied the request, affirming a decision by 3rd District Judge Richard Mrazik, which led Richins’ attorneys to ask to move the trial to Salt Lake County altogether. That secondary request was denied by Mrazik earlier this month. He then granted a request to put the case on hold while Richins’ attorneys file yet another appeal.

“The trial judge correctly interpreted Utah law to conclude that jurors must be selected from a single county. We affirm,” the court concluded about splitting jury selection.

In the other decision officially handed down Thursday, the state’s high court looked at whether Laura Scott, the 3rd District Court’s presiding judge, abused her discretion by denying a request for in-person jury selection.

“The presiding judge did not abuse her discretion when she denied the parties’ stipulated request for an in-person jury selection,” the justices wrote in their opinion. “The trial judge did not abuse his discretion when he denied the parties’ stipulated request to expand the jury venire.”

Associate Chief Justice John Pearce, who penned the opinion for the unanimous decision, recognized that the presiding judge admitted there was "no doubt this is a high-profile case attracting attention from both conventional and 'new media.'" Nevertheless, the judge pointed out that numerous similar cases are presently pending in the 3rd District Court.

The presiding judge argued that 'similarly to what has been implemented in various previous instances, concerns related to camera presence and crowd size within and near the courtroom during trials can be managed through meticulously designed jury questionnaires, detailed jury guidelines, and rules concerning proper conduct.' The presiding judge ultimately determined that the involved parties did not sufficiently justify why an in-person jury selection process was necessary to tackle broader worries about 'significant media coverage.'

At present, the process of selecting jurors for criminal cases in the 3rd District Court takes place online.

Richins' lawyers haven't submitted their appeal aimed at relocating her trial from Summit County. They previously contended this was necessary due to extensive media coverage and because many residents of Summit County have ties to the case.

She was ordered to stand trial Regarding accusations of aggravated murder and attempted murder, which are considered first-degree felonies; two instances of dispensing a controlled substance, two cases of insurance fraud, and two allegations of submitting false insurance claims, all classified as second-degree felonies; along with three counts of forgery, constituting a third-degree felony.