Tweet
Check out this related story:
Jan. 24, 2004
The Utah Supreme Court has upheld a state law that allows defendants charged with murdering a pregnant women also to be prosecuted for the death of a fetus at any stage of its development.
Friday's ruling puts Utah's fetal homicide law -- which has an exception for legal abortion -- on firm footing with similar statutes in at least 13 other states. About a dozen other states criminalize fetal homicide, but at various developmental stages later than conception.
Roger MacGuire, 50, now faces trial on two counts of capital murder for the 2001 slaying of his 38-year-old ex-wife. Susan MacGuire was 13 to 15 weeks pregnant when MacGuire allegedly fired two shots into her abdomen after ambushing her at the Layton insurance office where she worked.
Prosecutors say MacGuire snapped when he learned Susan MacGuire was pregnant by her new boyfriend and had plans to marry him.
Assistant Utah Attorney General Christopher Ballard, who represented the state in the appeal, said Friday's opinion in favor of the law upholds "the will of the people."
"In Utah, we believe that it's a crime to kill an unborn child unless you're the mother of that child, with a constitutional right to make that choice," he said. "But no one else has the right to make that choice for the mother, and that is what this ruling affirms."
MacGuire's appellate attorney, Scott Wiggins, could not be reached Friday. But Wiggins had argued the justices should declare the law unconstitutionally vague because it did not specify at what stage of development a fetus becomes an "unborn child," which is the only defining language for gestation in the statute.
Responding to MacGuire's appeal in 2002, lawmakers added the phrase "at any stage of development" to make clear that it applies from conception. But that change did not apply to MacGuire, and on Friday the justices ruled the law was clear even before the amendment.
"We conclude that the term 'unborn child' is not unconstitutionally vague because, absent modifying language to the contrary, it clearly encompasses a human being at any stage of development in utero," wrote Associate Chief Justice Matthew B. Durrant for the court Friday.
The high court went on to say because the term has a "straightforward definition," prosecutors are not left to speculate as to the statute's meaning.
Chief Justice Christine M. Durham agreed with the majority on the law's constitutionality. But she authored a dissent, pointing to another section in state code that makes it a capital offense to murder "two or more persons."
Durham argued that because a fetus, under Utah law, is not "a full legal 'person' " MacGuire should not be subject to the death penalty.
Justice Jill N. Parrish wrote a response to Durham, saying the term "person" must be read in context with the fetal homicide statute, which only refers to "unborn children."
Davis County Attorney Mel Wilson said prosecutors will proceed with MacGuire's case as soon as possible. MacGuire is being held in the Davis County Jail without bail.
"We felt like we were on solid ground in the first place and that we would prevail on the appeal, but it is a controversial issue and one that [is] being debated across the county," Wilson said Friday.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act introduced last year in Congress is akin to Utah's statute. But, unlike in Utah, the federal bill does not provide for the prosecution of a woman for actions (other than abortion) while pregnant, such as drug use, that harms or kills her fetus.
Utah's fetal homicide law was first used in 1997 to charge Dayna Pittman with child abuse homicide for killing her unborn child through the use of methamphetamine. Pittman pleaded guilty to the charge. Since then, the statute has also been used against two women charged with child abuse for harming their unborn children with drugs.
Ballard said he does not think Friday's opinion could be considered a victory for either pro- or anti-abortion camps.
"I don't know that the opinion supports either side to the extent they would want it to," he said. "I think that regardless of your stance on abortion, either side of the abortion debate could use this opinion to further their case."
Still, Karrie Galloway, executive director of Planned Parenthood of Utah, said she can't help but question the intent of fetal homicide laws like Utah's.
"I just wonder if we're really addressing the justice system here, or if we are being political for those who are intent on reversing Roe. v. Wade," she said. "At least if you're looking at viability, that's one thing, but if we're going to infer personhood at any point of a pregnancy, we are really pushing the envelope."
Former state Sen. Steve Poulton, who sponsored the 2002 amendment, said he was pleased with Friday's opinion which he says should make people re-evaluate their own beliefs about abortion laws.
"I'm glad that the Supreme Court made the right call," he said. "I think people ought to realize the hypocrisy of saying let's prosecute someone for murder when they kill a fetus in a violent act to the mother, but it's OK to kill a fetus in a nonviolent act."
Jan. 24, 2004
The Utah Supreme Court has upheld a state law that allows defendants charged with murdering a pregnant women also to be prosecuted for the death of a fetus at any stage of its development.
Friday's ruling puts Utah's fetal homicide law -- which has an exception for legal abortion -- on firm footing with similar statutes in at least 13 other states. About a dozen other states criminalize fetal homicide, but at various developmental stages later than conception.
Roger MacGuire, 50, now faces trial on two counts of capital murder for the 2001 slaying of his 38-year-old ex-wife. Susan MacGuire was 13 to 15 weeks pregnant when MacGuire allegedly fired two shots into her abdomen after ambushing her at the Layton insurance office where she worked.
Prosecutors say MacGuire snapped when he learned Susan MacGuire was pregnant by her new boyfriend and had plans to marry him.
Assistant Utah Attorney General Christopher Ballard, who represented the state in the appeal, said Friday's opinion in favor of the law upholds "the will of the people."
"In Utah, we believe that it's a crime to kill an unborn child unless you're the mother of that child, with a constitutional right to make that choice," he said. "But no one else has the right to make that choice for the mother, and that is what this ruling affirms."
MacGuire's appellate attorney, Scott Wiggins, could not be reached Friday. But Wiggins had argued the justices should declare the law unconstitutionally vague because it did not specify at what stage of development a fetus becomes an "unborn child," which is the only defining language for gestation in the statute.
Responding to MacGuire's appeal in 2002, lawmakers added the phrase "at any stage of development" to make clear that it applies from conception. But that change did not apply to MacGuire, and on Friday the justices ruled the law was clear even before the amendment.
"We conclude that the term 'unborn child' is not unconstitutionally vague because, absent modifying language to the contrary, it clearly encompasses a human being at any stage of development in utero," wrote Associate Chief Justice Matthew B. Durrant for the court Friday.
The high court went on to say because the term has a "straightforward definition," prosecutors are not left to speculate as to the statute's meaning.
Chief Justice Christine M. Durham agreed with the majority on the law's constitutionality. But she authored a dissent, pointing to another section in state code that makes it a capital offense to murder "two or more persons."
Durham argued that because a fetus, under Utah law, is not "a full legal 'person' " MacGuire should not be subject to the death penalty.
Justice Jill N. Parrish wrote a response to Durham, saying the term "person" must be read in context with the fetal homicide statute, which only refers to "unborn children."
Davis County Attorney Mel Wilson said prosecutors will proceed with MacGuire's case as soon as possible. MacGuire is being held in the Davis County Jail without bail.
"We felt like we were on solid ground in the first place and that we would prevail on the appeal, but it is a controversial issue and one that [is] being debated across the county," Wilson said Friday.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act introduced last year in Congress is akin to Utah's statute. But, unlike in Utah, the federal bill does not provide for the prosecution of a woman for actions (other than abortion) while pregnant, such as drug use, that harms or kills her fetus.
Utah's fetal homicide law was first used in 1997 to charge Dayna Pittman with child abuse homicide for killing her unborn child through the use of methamphetamine. Pittman pleaded guilty to the charge. Since then, the statute has also been used against two women charged with child abuse for harming their unborn children with drugs.
Ballard said he does not think Friday's opinion could be considered a victory for either pro- or anti-abortion camps.
"I don't know that the opinion supports either side to the extent they would want it to," he said. "I think that regardless of your stance on abortion, either side of the abortion debate could use this opinion to further their case."
Still, Karrie Galloway, executive director of Planned Parenthood of Utah, said she can't help but question the intent of fetal homicide laws like Utah's.
"I just wonder if we're really addressing the justice system here, or if we are being political for those who are intent on reversing Roe. v. Wade," she said. "At least if you're looking at viability, that's one thing, but if we're going to infer personhood at any point of a pregnancy, we are really pushing the envelope."
Former state Sen. Steve Poulton, who sponsored the 2002 amendment, said he was pleased with Friday's opinion which he says should make people re-evaluate their own beliefs about abortion laws.
"I'm glad that the Supreme Court made the right call," he said. "I think people ought to realize the hypocrisy of saying let's prosecute someone for murder when they kill a fetus in a violent act to the mother, but it's OK to kill a fetus in a nonviolent act."
Comment