Skip to content
Main Menu
Utah Attorney General
Search
Attorney General
Sean D. Reyes
Utah Office of the Attorney General
Secondary Navigation

Carbon County Sheriff James Cordova Charged Today in Utah’s Seventh District Court

Carbon County, UT Dec. 4, 2014 — Assistant Attorney General Matthew E. Lloyd and Attorney General Sean D. Reyes filed charges today against Carbon County Sheriff James Cordova in the Seventh District Court in and for Carbon County, State of Utah. Based on an investigation led by Special Agent R. Ed Spann of the Attorney General’s Office, charges include a third degree felony for allegedly misusing public money, a third degree felony for alleged theft, and a class C misdemeanor for an alleged license plate and registration card violation.
 
“The AG’s office is extremely supportive of law enforcement and works closely and effectively with Sheriffs’ offices throughout the state. At the same time, allegations of breaching the public trust are a serious matter and our office has worked diligently and professionally to investigate and file charges on Sheriff Cordova’s alleged wrongdoings,” said Attorney General Sean Reyes.
 
General Reyes also cautions, “The Sheriff is presumed innocent and people should allow the legal process to take its course without prejudging him or his alleged actions.”
 
Sheriff Cordova has been offered proceeding by summons with his first court date will be January 12 not yet available.

# # #

Attorney General Reyes Joins Multiple States in Lawsuit Filed in Texas Challenging President Obama’s Unilateral Executive Action

SALT LAKE CITY Dec. 3, 2014 — Today, Attorney General Sean D. Reyes signed onto a multi-state lawsuit filed in Texas challenging President Obama’s unilateral executive action regarding deportation and illegal immigration. The lawsuit is based on a constitutional challenge to the President bypassing Congress and exceeding his executive authority. Secondarily, to the extent he had any rule making authority, the lawsuit addresses how he failed to comply with statutory requirements.

Attorney General Sean Reyes stated: 

“This lawsuit is not about immigration policy. Whether you agree or disagree with some, all or none of the President’s proposal is not the point. The process is what is being challenged. The process is not legal. Regardless of how you feel about the policy, it does not justify implementation in an unconstitutional manner. 

We need solutions from Congress. The President is not the only one frustrated by Congress’s impasse on this issue. But, when states like Utah attempted to address the issue through legislation, they did so with the belief that it was through a proper exercise of sovereign police and other powers and an understanding that the courts would check that power if not. 

It was President Obama, through the Justice Department, who argued states were preempted from passing laws related to immigration because Congress had exclusive jurisdiction for enactment of such laws.  Ironically, the President has now done the exact thing he claimed states were not permitted to do. As with the states, the President’s attempt at lawmaking should be reviewed by the courts. 

While people of goodwill can debate the merits of his policy, even the President has acknowledged that he is not above the law and that his powers are limited by Congress’s exclusive authority in this area.

The President, regardless of political party, must respect the rule of law and a balance of powers. At the same time, Congress has not only the legal authority but also the responsibility to take up matters such as these no matter how difficult they may be.”

# # #

Attorney General Sean D. Reyes Op-Ed

Op-Ed: Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes on President Obama’s Executive Order

Dec. 3, 2014 — “One of the pillars of our constitutional form of government is a separation of powers, vesting in Congress the power to legislate and in the Presidency the duty to faithfully execute the law.

However, by executive fiat this past Thursday, President Obama obliterated that pillar and circumvented safeguards that provide order to our republic.

Regardless of how one feels about immigration policy, the President’s process of new policy implementation should be of great concern to us all. There is a proper role for Executive Orders, in harmony with Congressional intent.  But this is not it.

The President justifies his actions as being borne out of frustration—as if indignation alone can endow him with a power he has readily acknowledged is not his.

In 2010, President Obama said, “I am not a king. I can’t do these things by myself.” He was responding to the idea of rewriting immigration laws unilaterally. In other words, he was saying he did not have the authority to take “executive action” on immigration.

Also in 2010, he said “such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair.” In 2011, at a Univision town hall, he said ignoring the laws on the books “would not conform with my role as president.”

As recently as March of this year, he said “I cannot ignore…laws that are on the books,” noting that he is “constrained in terms of what I am able to do.”

By one count, President Obama said 22 times that he lacks the constitutional authority for such executive action.

Now, though, he’s doing exactly that, ignoring the law and usurping authority the Constitution has vested in Congress, not the White House.  He either changed his mind completely in just a few months or lied to the country—over and over again.

As the Attorney General of Utah, it is my job to defend the laws of our state and I take the rule of law seriously. I swore an oath, just as President Obama did, to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Americans should be concerned, outraged even, that our president would ignore that oath for political expediency.

It’s hard to understand how the president could go back on his word in such dramatic fashion. What changed?

For one, the President is no longer accountable to voters. He’s not up for re-election and his party lost badly in the mid-term elections. And when a new Congress takes office in January, he will face a Republican controlled Congress that is ready to take up immigration issues for the first time during his two terms.  Politically speaking, the president has nothing to lose.

Unfortunately, the country has a lot to lose when a president ignores not only the limits to his power but also the will of the American people expressed through our representatives. It weakens the entire constitutional order and our system of checks-and-balances.

If the president thinks he has the authority to act unilaterally, what can’t he do? Can he justify any action? What else will he try to do in his final two years? And what further precedent does this set for future Presidents of any political party to ignore constitutional safeguards.

In February of 2013, during a White House Google hangout, President Obama said, “I’m the President of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.” That was true then. That is true now. I had hoped, for the sake of our country and constitution, that President Obama actually believed that.”

 

Tenth Circuit Issues Opinion in R.S. 2477 Case Kane County and Utah v. United State

SALT LAKE CITY Dec. 2, 2014 —The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion today in the R.S. 2477 case of Kane County and Utah v. United States. A three judge panel affirmed that the State and county have legal title to six of twelve roads and held that there was no dispute as to title in the remaining six. The opinion again rejected SUWA’s claim that the statute of limitations bars the road claims.  The court also determined that the existence of water reserves do not bar road claims.

The court agreed with the United States’ position that there is no dispute with the State and Kane County’s ownership of the Hancock, Sand Dunes, and four Cave Lakes roads.  The court held that because there is no dispute as to title, the court has no jurisdiction to hear the claims to these roads. Without a dispute regarding the ownership of these roads, the State of Utah and Kane County may treat these roads as R.S. 2477 rights-of-way and manage them to ensure that the access provided by these roads remains safe and open.

Despite the apparent acknowledgement by the United States of the State and county’s ownership of the roads, the issue remains ambiguous until a court formally quiets title in the State and county or the United States formally disclaims any ownership of the roads.  Therefore, the Office of the Attorney General is considering filing a Petition for Rehearing before the entire Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, which must be filed within 45 days. The effect of this opinion on the roads in the other pending cases remains to be determined on a road by road basis.  The court’s decision does not address roads other than the twelve Kane County roads. The State, therefore, intends to continue moving forward developing the evidence as to title on all other R.S. 2477 rights-of-way.  The State is encouraged that the issues of the statute of limitations and the effect of Public Water Reserves have been put to rest.

# # #

Click here for more information on R.S. 2477 Roads 

Rocky Mountain Power Warns Customers of Phone Scam

Rocky Mountain Power is warning its customers and the public of a phone scam targeting its customers with criminals posing as utility customer service agents trying to get money and to steal personal information.

The fraud is occurring nationwide, but recent days have seen an upsurge in Rocky Mountain Power’s service area. The thieves are using sophisticated deceptive tactics that make it appear to Caller ID systems that the scam call is coming from the utility even when it is not. If customers receive such a call, hang up and call the company at 1-888-221-7070 to verify the call’s origins.

Rocky Mountain Power call center agents can be reached any time, day or night, toll free at 1-888-221-7070. That is the only number to call for any customer service need or if you suspect a call may not actually be from Rocky Mountain Power.

MORE INFORMATION

District Court Rules Utah Law to be Constitutional, Dismisses Lawsuit

The Utah Department of Commerce and the Office of the Utah Attorney General Successfully Defend State Law Implemented in 2011 Amending the Utah Construction Trades Licensing Act

SALT LAKE CITY Nov. 19, 2014 — The Utah Department of Commerce and the Office of the Utah Attorney General successfully defended a constitutional challenge to portions of Utah’s Construction Trades Licensing Act. On Nov. 18, 2014, in a 34-page decision, the Honorable Judge Robert J. Shelby of the United States District Court for the District of Utah ruled that the challenged portions of the Utah Law were not preempted by federal law, denying Universal Contracting’s claims and dismissing the lawsuit.

In 2011, the Utah Legislature passed amendments to the Utah Construction Trades Licensing Act, creating sanctions for unincorporated entities with owners who are not lawfully present in the United States and engaged in the construction trade in Utah.  The legislation was sponsored by Utah Sen. Karen Mayne and Utah Rep. Todd Kiser.  Unincorporated entities found to be in violation of the Act face possible license revocation, as well as criminal and civil penalties. The Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing within the Utah Department of Commerce is responsible for regulating Utah’s construction trades and enforcing the provisions of the Act.

“This particular case took great insight and expertise by all involved. I’d like to thank the Utah Department of Commerce and the very talented attorneys and staff in our office who skillfully defended state law,” said Attorney General Sean Reyes.

“The Department of Commerce and our Division Directors are grateful for the hard work and steadfast dedication on behalf of the Attorney General’s Office under Sean Reyes’ continued leadership.  This court ruling was a win for both licensees and the public as the mission of the Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing is to ensure contractors abide by the law to provide a level playing field for business throughout Utah,” stated Francine A. Giani, Executive Director, Utah Department of Commerce.

In 2012, Universal Contracting, LLC, brought suit in Utah’s Federal District Court, arguing, inter alia, that the Utah’s 2011 immigration related amendments were preempted by federal law. More specifically, Universal Contracting argued that the amendments were preempted by the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), under that law’s express preemption provisions, and because the amendments were in conflict with certain provisions of the IRCA. The Utah Department of Commerce and the Office of the Utah Attorney General argued that State licensing laws are expressly exempted from the IRCA and that Utah’s amendments were not in conflict with federal law. Judge Shelby agreed, entering judgment in favor the Department of Commerce and dismissing all of Universal Contracting’s claims.

Assistant Attorney General Judith Jensen was lead counsel for the State of Utah on behalf of the Department of Commerce, assisted by Utah Solicitor General Bridget Romano, Assistant Attorney General Blaine Ferguson, Assistant Attorney General Ché Arguello, and Assistant Attorney General Sterling Corbett.

 # # #

 

Public Meeting Notice: School Safety Tip Line Commission

The School Safety Tip Line Commission is meeting Wednesday, November 12, from 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM. The meeting will be held at the Capitol Complex in the East Senate Building in the Kletting Room. The agenda is as follows:

1. Approval of Minutes
2. App, Text, Phone, Web Report
3. Mental Health Care Provider Report
4. Private/Public Partnership
5. Working with the Board of Education and Utah Counties
6. Discussion
7. Reporting
8. Next Steps
If you would like to attend, please feel free. This meeting is open to the public. More information about the meeting can be found at pmn.utah.gov. Information about the Commission can be found here.

Utah Prosecution Council

Click here for the UPC website

MISSION STATEMENT

The purpose of the organization [Utah Prosecution Council and the Statewide Association of Public Attorneys using their combined efforts] is to effectively and accurately represent and advocate the interests of public attorneys; to enhance and facilitate communication and coordination within the organization and with other entities; to provide quality, relevant training through full participation of all members with an exchange of information and experience; to coordinate programs among public attorneys to assist all members to better perform their duties.

GOALS ADOPTED IN FURTHERANCE OF THE MISSION STATEMENT

A. To be respected
Action Steps

  • Strive to deliver a “quality product”
  • Prosecutors’ offices should be staffed with experienced and well-trained staff members who receive appropriate compensation
  • “Pick our battles” and pursue a consistent, statewide approach
  • Take a more active part in the Utah State Bar

B. Facilitate communication
Action Steps

  • Establish and maintain a brief bank; issue position papers stating the members’ positions on issues of concern to public attorneys; organize and maintain an ordinance and forms bank
  • Create a computer network linking all offices
  • Implement regional exchanges of information and assistance
  • Facilitate professional and social interaction between public attorneys

C. Accurately and adequately represent and express the views of the members
Action Steps

  • Actively pursue the legislative aims of the members; regularly meet with regional representatives chosen by members in the various regions of the state; disseminate position papers to other agencies, the press and the public; poll members from time to time to accurately determine their positions on various topics (consensus)
  • Meet regularly with other law enforcement organizations; be proactive relative to other organizations–actively approaching them for purposes of establishing common grounds; join and associate with other organizations and groups
  • Sponsor an annual legislative forum where public attorneys and associated public agencies can formulate a coordinated legislative strategy

D. Facilitate appropriate and timely training
Action Steps

  • Actively seek out and use highly qualified training presenters
  • Maintain the present “no tuition” policy at training conferences
  • Organize regional training, thereby reducing members’ travel costs and time away from the office
  • Do a training needs assessment of the members
  • Require meaningful handouts from presenters

E. Facilitate member participation
Action Steps

  • Positions to be decided by a vote of all members
  • Pursue regular contact with less active members by officers, staff and by active members, thereby encouraging full participation by all members
  • Ask members to serve on ad hoc committees
  • Provide for and actively seek involvement from deputies and assistants
  • Provide for regular rotation of leadership

Special Investigations

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND PUBLIC CORRUPTION UNIT (SIPCU)

Tip Line: 801.281.1200

The mission of the Investigations Division is to identify, apprehend and prosecute violations of the criminal laws of the State of Utah and the United States through professional investigation of criminal complaints.

The Investigations Division may investigate the following:

  • Complex white-collar and financial crimes
  • Public corruption
  • General fraud
  • Child abuse and exploitation, which includes sex abuse, physical abuse, homicide and child pornography
  • Cybercrime, internet fraud and identity theft
  • Difficult crimes associated with closed societies
  • Criminal environmental complaints
  • Antitrust complaints
  • Significant street crime, including homicide, aggravated assault, and sex crimes where a local authority requests our involvement