Estimated read time: 5-6 minutes
- A judge disqualified Salt Lake County prosecutors from a juvenile case, citing evidence of an inappropriate relationship and maintaining case integrity.
- The case involves a 15-year-old boy who pleaded guilty to manslaughter, but whose conviction was reversed based on lack of disclosure of the relationship and other evidence.
- The boy is accused of killing an adult who had robbed him at gunpoint earlier that night.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office was disqualified from prosecuting a juvenile case based on a "series of missteps" and a "recurring lack of transparency," months after the judge reversed a 15-year-old boy's manslaughter conviction.
The boy was initially arrested in August 2023 for investigation of murder after officers found 24-year-old Niusami Auelua dead at Scottsdale Park, 3755 W. 3100 South.
On Aug. 17, 2023, about 2:35 a.m., Auelua robbed the boy at gunpoint and then fled on a bike. Shortly after, the 14-year-old boy confronted the man with a knife, stabbing him and causing his death, according to the judge's order.
Initially, the district attorney's office did not file charges but asked for more information, citing the possibility of it being a self-defense case. About six months later, deputy Salt Lake County attorney Adrianna Davis filed criminal charges. She was involved in the case until a colleague reported a possible conflict of interest — claiming she was involved in an "inappropriate personal relationship" with a detective connected to the case, the judge's order said.
Third District Juvenile Court Judge David Johnson determined that texts between Davis and the detective, Josue Llil, were enough to establish an inappropriate relationship, but said in the order he ultimately determined the office could not prosecute the case to protect the integrity of the case based on both the relationship and other issues.
After the ruling, issued on May 21, District Attorney Sim Gill said in a statement that his office is committed to fairness for all defendants.
"Though we are disappointed with this decision, we respect the judicial process," he said.
A set-aside conviction
In February 2024, the then-14-year-old boy was charged with murder, a first-degree felony, in juvenile court along with obstruction of justice, a second-degree felony, and possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor, a class B misdemeanor.
He was convicted of manslaughter, pleading guilty to the reduced charge under a plea deal, and sentenced to secure care in the juvenile system in September 2024. Attorneys agreed to recommend he stay in secure care until he turns 25, the longest sentence possible in juvenile court.
Three months later, a new attorney for the boy filed a motion asking to have the conviction set aside based on that inappropriate relationship, which prosecutors later agreed to — but they cited a "discovery violation" and disputed the relationship existed, the order said.
In a hearing on March 12, Johnson set aside his conviction. The judge later decided to send him to a residential treatment program while his case goes back into prosecution, deciding not to allow him to return home to live with his mother on an ankle monitor.
His attorney, Nathan Evershed, said in a statement, "We look forward to continuing our vigorous advocacy for our 15-year-old client in court and are eager to help him get his life back."
Disqualification
Evershed argued the relationship between the prosecutor assigned to the case and a lead investigator compromised the integrity of the case, the order said, but the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office denied the relationship existed and said there was no evidence that if it did exist it had an impact on the case.
Gill said in a statement to KSL in March that the office "categorically den(ies)" that the case was compromised or anyone was treated unfairly because of personal relationships. He said his office stood by the original filing of the case but agreed the judge should let the guilty plea be withdrawn "out of an abundance of caution and to avoid any appearance of impropriety due to a technical discovery violation."
Johnson determined disqualification of the attorney's office would be necessary "to protect the integrity of this important and serious proceeding." The judge said the "cumulative effect" of what prosecutors did undermined public confidence in the case.
It noted that prosecutors neglected to disclose conflicts and discovery, resulting in a lack of transparency in the internal investigation and an overall appearance of impropriety.
"In the unique context of juvenile court, where equity, rehabilitation, and the child's best interest are central, the court's equitable powers provide a broader mandate other than safeguard the integrity and perceived impartiality of the process," the judge said.
He said juvenile courts are considered civil rather than criminal and are focused on the juveniles' best interests rather than punishment.
Johnson determined that there was at least an "appearance of impropriety," citing the text messages, which led to the decision to pass the case to separate prosecutors, specifically the Utah Attorney General's Office.
His order also cited an email exchange where the co-worker who reported the relationship said Davis admitted she could not prove murder in the case, but filed the charge as murder to increase chances of a guilty plea to manslaughter. The co-worker later resigned from the office, the order said, based on the response to her reports.
The judge said the attorney assigned to the case after Davis was removed was the prosecutor the relationship was first reported to, which he said brings a question of whether his involvement in the case when the 15-year-old pleaded guilty calls into question whether his involvement in the plea addresses the appearance of impropriety.
In an email to people in the district attorney's office cited by the judge, Gill said that it was "deeply disappointed" that attorneys "chose to inject lurid and irrelevant accusations into court records" about employees' private lives. The judge said the internal email showed a lack of neutrality, which is required for justice.
Johnson said Gill's claim in the email that he would continue to defend attorneys who are "attacked by unsupported allegations" undermined the prosecutor's arguments in the 15-year-old's case that the conflict of interest had been addressed.
The case is scheduled for a hearing on June 23, where the judge will consider a motion filed by the boy to dismiss the case entirely.
