Thomas Jackson (1947 – ) was a Mormon church member; convicted of sexual abuse in Utah and Idaho; is a person of interest in a Nancy Baird's murder, which was originally Ted Bundy was blamed for; is currently in prison in Salt Lake City; is a registered sex offender as of Oct. 2026.

Thomas Richard Jackson was a Mormon and former police officer for the defunct city of East Layton.

Utah, 1986: probation after abusing his daughters
Jackson pleaded guilty in 1986 to sexually abusing his daughters and served no time in prison or jail. Prosecutors filed the charge in Davis County on Aug. 20, 1986. The Information alleged that in May and June 1986 he took indecent liberties with his daughters, or caused them to do so with him.
Jackson waived his preliminary examination on Oct. 2, 1986, and pleaded guilty on Oct. 14, 1986, before Judge Douglas L. Cornaby. On Nov. 10, 1986, the court sentenced him to 0 to 5 years in the Utah State Prison and a $1,500 fine. The court suspended both on condition of probation.
Probation terms required counseling through Davis County Mental Health and Parents United, 200 hours of community service, and payment of the victims’ counseling costs. A handwritten note on the sentencing form reads “Consider 402 at end of probation,” a reference to Utah’s procedure for reducing a conviction’s degree. The court’s electronic docket still lists the conviction as a second degree felony; no reduction is recorded.
Jackson moved to Arizona under an interstate compact while on probation. The court terminated his probation on June 14, 1988, after about 19 months. According to COLD, his daughters were 11 and 9 when he was sentenced and returned to the home, and the abuse continued afterward.

Idaho, 1996: 15 years in prison for abusing his stepdaughters
Jackson was convicted in Idaho in 1996 of lewd conduct with a child under 16 and served 15 years before parole. After moving to Idaho, he married a woman with four daughters under age 10, according to COLD.
Jerome County prosecutors charged him on Dec. 19, 1995, with two counts of lewd conduct with a child under 16. He waived his preliminary hearing on Dec. 29, 1995. On Feb. 6, 1996, he pleaded guilty to one count under a plea agreement, and the second count was dismissed. The abuse involved two stepdaughters, ages 7 and 9 at sentencing, and had gone on for about two years, according to the Idaho Supreme Court.
On April 2, 1996, Judge R. Barry Wood sentenced Jackson to a fixed term of life in prison. The court heard testimony from his biological daughters, his stepdaughters and his first wife before sentencing.
Jackson appealed. The Idaho Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Silak, held the fixed life sentence excessive and modified it to life with 15 years fixed (State v. Jackson, No. 22892, 1997). Chief Justice Trout dissented, finding no abuse of discretion. The district court entered an amended judgment on April 24, 2002.
Jackson was released on parole in 2011, according to KSL. He then lived on relatives’ property in Buhl, Idaho, under parole terms barring unsupervised contact with children, according to COLD.

Utah, 2025: five consecutive prison terms for decades-old abuse
Jackson pleaded no contest in 2025 to five counts of sexual abuse of a child and was sentenced to five consecutive terms of 1 to 15 years. The conviction is on appeal.
Davis County prosecutors filed the charges on Aug. 21, 2023. Four counts list an offense date of May 2, 1986, and one lists May 11, 1983. A Utah judge issued a no-bail warrant on Aug. 23, 2023. Jackson waived extradition in Idaho on Sept. 1, 2023, and was booked into the Davis County Jail on Sept. 7.
In November 2023, the court released him to electronic home confinement in Idaho, supervised by his Idaho parole agent. Trial dates were set and continued three times, in December 2024, April 2025 and fall 2025.
On Aug. 28, 2025, Jackson pleaded no contest to all five counts as charged before Judge Michael D. DiReda. The court ordered him into custody on Nov. 7, 2025. At sentencing on Nov. 26, 2025, the court heard statements from victims, imposed five consecutive terms of 1 to 15 years in the Utah State Prison and entered a continuous protective order for the victims.
Jackson filed a notice of appeal on Dec. 5, 2025 (Utah Court of Appeals No. 20251510). He is in custody at the Central Utah Correctional Facility, according to the Utah Department of Corrections. His release date is set by the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole.

Person of interest: the disappearance of Nancy Perry Baird
The Davis County Sheriff’s Office classifies Jackson as a person of interest in the 1975 disappearance of Nancy Perry Baird. He has not been charged and denies involvement. Investigators say he is not their only person of interest.
Baird vanished on July 4, 1975, from a Fina gas station on U.S. 89 in East Layton, Utah, where she worked. Her locked car, her keys and her purse were left behind, according to the Charley Project. Jackson served as an East Layton police officer from April 1975 to July 1976, according to KSL. The case was long attributed to Ted Bundy, who denied any knowledge of Baird before his execution.
In an April 2023 interview with KSL’s COLD podcast, Jackson said he arrived at the gas station after Baird was reported missing. Later in the same interview, he said he wished he had stayed five minutes longer, a statement KSL reports implied he was present shortly before she disappeared.
Weeks after that interview aired in May 2023, Davis County and Layton detectives questioned Jackson in Idaho, and he took a polygraph examination. He denied involvement. A detective told Jackson he did not believe Jackson was fully honest, KSL reports.
On May 8, 2025, detectives excavated the backyard of the Layton home where Jackson lived in 1975, after cadaver dogs alerted and a ground-penetrating radar survey found an underground void. No human remains were found, and investigators have ruled out the property. Sgt. Ryan Kirkman told KSL the case remains active, investigators are examining two additional sites, and former colleague David Anderson is among others they have considered.

Jackson is currently in Utah State Prison as of October 2026.

Jackson is a registered sex offender as of October 2026.

If you have any information about Jackson’s LDS membership history please contact us.

Have any info on this case? Contact FLOODLIT.

Reader-funded investigative journalism

Help us raise money

FLOODLIT needs to raise funds to cover immediate operating bills and keep our independent newsroom running.

If this case report, our source documents, or our database have been useful to you, please help us.

Donate now →

FLOODLIT is 100% reader-funded. Every amount helps.

Search the FLOODLIT Database

Share this page https://floodlit.org/a/b822/

Sources

  1. STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON CASE NUMBER 861705415 , Utah Court Records, October 8, 1986.
  2. CR-1995-134 | State of Idaho vs. Thomas Richard Jackson, Idaho Court Records, December 19, 1995.
  3. CV42-23-3463 | State of Idaho Plaintiff, vs. Thomas Jackson Defendant / Fugitive Warrant, Idaho Court Records, August 24, 2023.
  4. Thomas Richard Jackson, Utah Department of Corrections, October 1, 2026.
  5. Davis County deputies excavate back yard of former police officer in search of cold case victim / VIDEO, KSL, October 1, 2026.
  6. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON, Defendant / Case No. [86 CR 430] [CR 5415], Cold Podcast/ Utah Court Records, October 8, 1986.
  7. STATE v. JACKSON Supreme Court of Idaho., Casemine, July 24, 1997.
  8. STATE v. JACKSON (1997) Supreme Court of Idaho. STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Thomas Richard JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant., Caselaw, April 9, 1997.
  9. Thomas Richard Jackson / INCARCERATED, Utah Department of Public Safety, April 4, 1996.
  10. STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS R JACKSON CASE NUMBER 231701597, Utah Court Records, August 21, 2023.
  11. State v. Jackson State v. Jackson Idaho Supreme Court · Decided April 9, 1997 · Silak, Trout, Johnson, Medevitt, Schroeder 939 P.2d 1372; 130 Idaho 293; 1997 Ida. LEXIS 45 (Pacific Reporter, Second Series), Hall Approved, April 9, 1997.

  • 1. STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON CASE NUMBER 861705415

    • 19861008
    • News article
    • Utah Court Records

    SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT - FARMINGTON DISTRICT COURT
    DAVIS COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH
    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    CASE NUMBER 861705415 State Felony

    CHARGES

    Charge 1 - 76-5-404.1 - SEX ABUSE CHILD - 2nd Degree Felony
    Offense Date: May 01, 1986
    Plea: October 14, 1986 Guilty
    Disposition: October 14, 1986 Guilty

    PARTIES
    Plaintiff - STATE OF UTAH
    Defendant - THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    DEFENDANT INFORMATION
    Defendant Name: THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    Date of Birth: October 09, 1947
    Law Enforcement Agency: LAYTON CITY POLICE
    Prosecuting Agency: DAVIS COUNTY
    Violation Date: 05-01-1986

    ACCOUNT SUMMARY
    CASE NOTE
    PROCEEDINGS
    DATE SEQ EVENT
    10-08-1986 Case filed by lindaw
    10-14-1986 Charge 1 Disposition is Guilty
    03-08-2007 1 Filed: Case File
    10-01-2026 02:45 PM Page 1 of 1

  • 2. CR-1995-134 | State of Idaho vs. Thomas Richard Jackson

    • 19951219
    • News article
    • Idaho Court Records

    Case Information

    CR-1995-134 | State of Idaho vs. Thomas Richard Jackson

    Case Number
    CR-1995-134

    Court
    Jerome County District Court

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    File Date
    12/19/1995

    Case Type
    Criminal

    Case Status
    Closed - After Judgment
    Party

    State
    State of Idaho

    Active Attorneys
    Lead Attorney
    Horgan, John L.

    Defendant
    Jackson, Thomas Richard

    DOB
    XX/XX/1947

    Active Attorneys
    Lead Attorney
    Whipple, Douglas Ray

    Retained
    Charge
    Charges
    Jackson, Thomas Richard
    Description Statute Level Date
    1 Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16 I18-1508 Felony 12/19/1995
    2 Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16 I18-1508 Felony 12/19/1995
    Bond

    Bond Type Bond Number Bond Amount Current Bond Status
    Cash Bond CR-1995-134 $304.00 Converted
    Disposition Events

    04/02/1996 Plea
    1
    Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16

    Guilty

    02/06/1996 Plea
    2
    Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16

    Not Guilty

    04/02/1996 Disposition
    1
    Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16

    Guilty

    02/06/1996 Disposition
    2
    Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16

    Dismissed on Motion of Prosecutor

    04/02/1996 Felony Sentence
    1
    Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16

    Felony Sentence

    Confinement

    Type: State Prison

    Facility: Idaho Department of Correction

    Effective Date: 04/02/1996

    Determinate: 15 Years

    Life

    Events and Hearings

    12/19/1995 Initiating Document - New Case Filed

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    New Case Filed

    12/19/1995 Criminal Complaint

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Criminal Complaint

    12/19/1995 Affidavit in Support of Complaint or Warrant

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Affd In Supprt Of Comp Or Warrant For Arrest

    12/19/1995 Arraignment

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Arraignment / First Appearance

    12/19/1995 Advisement of Rights

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Statement Of Defendants Rights

    12/19/1995 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Preliminary (12/29/1995) Thomas H. Borresen

    12/20/1995 Notice of Hearing

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Notice Of Hearing

    12/20/1995 Order Appointing Public Defender

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Order Appointing Public Defender

    12/29/1995 Hearing Waived

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Hearing Waived - Preliminary

    12/29/1995 Preliminary Hearing Waived (Bound Over)

    Judicial Officer
    Borresen, Thomas H.

    Comment
    Preliminary Hearing Waived (bound Over)

    12/29/1995 Transfer In (from Idaho Court Or County)

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Transfer In (from Idaho Court Or County)

    01/08/1996 Order

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Order Holding Defendant To Answer To D.c.

    01/08/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Arraignment (01/09/1996) Barry Wood

    01/08/1996 Felony Information Filed

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Information

    01/08/1996 Notice

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Notice Of Filing Information & Notc Of Arrn

    01/09/1996 Arraignment

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Arraignment / First Appearance

    01/10/1996 Notice

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Notice Of Response To Discovery

    01/10/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Pre-trial Conference (01/30/1996) Barry Wood

    01/10/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Jury Trial Scheduled (02/07/1996) Barry Wood

    01/31/1996 Interim Hearing Held

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Interim Hearing Held

    01/31/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Arrn/plea (02/06/1996) Barry Wood

    02/06/1996 Change Plea to Guilty Before Hearing/Trial

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Change Plea To Guilty Before H/t - Arrn/plea

    02/07/1996 Hearing Vacated

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Vacated - Jury Trial

    02/09/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Mtn Psycol Eval (02/13/1996) Barry Wood

    02/09/1996 Order

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Order For Presentence Investigation

    02/09/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Sentencing (03/26/1996) Barry Wood

    02/13/1996 Interim Hearing Held

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Interim Hearing Held - Mtn Psycol Eval

    02/15/1996 Motion

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Motion For Transport

    02/15/1996 Order

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Order

    02/15/1996 Certificate of Mailing

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Certificate Of Mailing

    03/04/1996 Hearing Vacated

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Vacated

    03/04/1996 Hearing Scheduled

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Scheduled - Sentencing (04/02/1996) Barry Wood

    04/02/1996 Hearing Held

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Hearing Held

    04/02/1996 Case Status Closed But Pending

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Case Status Closed But Pending

    04/02/1996 Final Judgment, Order Or Decree Entered

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Final Judgement, Order Or Decree Entered

    04/02/1996 Sentenced to Incarceration

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Sentenced To Incarceration

    04/02/1996 Miscellaneous

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Judgment Of Conviction & Order Of Commitment

    04/02/1996 Notice

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Notice Of Order Filed

    04/09/1996 Appeal Filed in Supreme Court

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Appealed To The Supreme Court

    04/09/1996 Notice

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Notice Of Appeal

    04/09/1996 Motion

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Motion To Reconsider Sentence

    04/24/2002 Judgment

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Amended Judgment

    11/06/2003 Miscellaneous

    Comment
    Affidavit And Notice of Failure to Pay- Overdue - Step 1, Failure to Pay Fines and Fees - Charge # 1, Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16 Appearance date: 11/20/2003

    07/29/2011 Miscellaneous

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Voided Transaction: Receipt or Disbursement (Receipt# 1107396 dated 7/29/2011)

    04/18/2012 Miscellaneous

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Voided Transaction: Receipt or Disbursement (Receipt# 1203610 dated 4/18/2012)

    04/18/2012 Bond Posted - Cash

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Bond Posted - Cash (Receipt 1203611 Dated 4/18/2012 for 304.00)

    04/18/2012 Miscellaneous

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    TAXN

    06/28/2012 Bond Converted

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Bond Converted (Receipt number 1206155 dated 6/28/2012 amount 304.00)

    01/02/2013 Miscellaneous

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Affidavit And Notice of Failure to Pay- Overdue - Step 1, Failure to Pay Fines and Fees - Charge # 1, Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16 Appearance date: 1/16/2013

    01/15/2013 Miscellaneous

    Judicial Officer
    Wood, R. Barry

    Comment
    Affidavit And Notice of Failure to Pay- Overdue - Step 1, Failure to Pay Fines and Fees - Charge # 1, Lewd Conduct With Child Under 16 Appearance date: 1/29/2013

    Financial

    Jackson, Thomas Richard
    Total Financial Assessment
    $2,114.50
    Total Payments and Credits
    $2,114.50
    4/2/1996 Transaction Assessment $15.50
    4/2/1996 Transaction Assessment $6.00
    4/2/1996 Transaction Assessment $250.00
    4/2/1996 Transaction Assessment $5.00
    10/28/2003 Transaction Assessment $1,820.00
    7/29/2011 Case Payment Receipt # 1107398 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    9/29/2011 Case Payment Receipt # 1109314 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    8/31/2011 Case Payment Receipt # 1108499 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    10/27/2011 Case Payment Receipt # 1110159 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    12/1/2011 Case Payment Receipt # 1111154 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.50)
    1/5/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1200116 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    4/5/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1203260 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    2/23/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1201738 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    1/26/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1200827 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    4/19/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1203664 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    5/31/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1205120 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    6/28/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1206155 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($304.00)
    6/28/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1206156 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    7/26/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1206904 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    9/6/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1208065 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    9/27/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1208837 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    10/25/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1209715 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    11/29/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1210736 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    12/21/2012 Case Payment Receipt # 1211452 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($50.00)
    1/9/2013 Case Payment Receipt # 1300260 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($276.50)
    1/24/2013 Case Payment Receipt # 1300683 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($276.50)
    2/7/2013 Case Payment Receipt # 1301100 Jackson, Thomas Richard ($339.00)
    6/20/2023 Transaction Assessment $18.00
    6/20/2023 Mail Payment Receipt # 05239-2023-R27 Tiffany Shropshire-Gilman ($18.00)

  • 3. CV42-23-3463 | State of Idaho Plaintiff, vs. Thomas Jackson Defendant / Fugitive Warrant

    • 20230824
    • News article
    • Idaho Court Records

    Case Information

    CV42-23-3463 | State of Idaho Plaintiff, vs. Thomas Jackson Defendant.

    Case Number
    CV42-23-3463

    Court
    Twin Falls County Magistrate Court

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    File Date
    08/24/2023

    Case Type
    H2i- Fugitive Warrant

    Case Status
    Closed
    Party

    Subject
    Jackson, Thomas Richard

    DOB
    XX/XX/1947

    Active Attorneys
    Attorney
    Ondo, Adam J.

    Retained
    Lead Attorney
    Office of the Public Defender-Twin Falls

    Retained

    State
    State of Idaho

    Active Attorneys
    Attorney
    Seamons, Justin Royce

    Retained
    Lead Attorney
    Loebs, Grant P.

    Retained
    Disposition Events

    09/15/2023 Judgment

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    Judgment Type
    Dismissed
    Events and Hearings

    08/24/2023 Extradition Proceedings

    Original Type
    Extradition Proceedings

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    Hearing Time
    1:00 PM

    Result
    Hearing Held
    Parties Present

    State

    Prosecuting Attorney: Loebs, Grant P.

    Subject: Jackson, Thomas Richard

    Public Defender: Office of the Public Defender-Twin Falls

    08/24/2023 New Case - Fugitive Warrant

    08/24/2023 Complaint Filed

    08/24/2023 Affidavit in Support of Complaint or Warrant

    Comment
    Redman

    08/24/2023 Affidavit

    Comment
    of Michelle Phinney

    08/24/2023 Fugitive Warrant

    08/24/2023 County Jail Packet

    08/24/2023 Notification of Rights

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    08/24/2023 Order Appointing Public Defender

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    08/24/2023 Court Minutes

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    Comment
    PD appointed

    08/24/2023 Notice of Remote Hearing

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    09/01/2023 Extradition Proceedings

    Original Type
    Extradition Proceedings

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    Hearing Time
    8:15 AM

    Result
    Hearing Held
    Parties Present

    State

    Prosecuting Attorney: Seamons, Justin Royce

    Subject: Jackson, Thomas Richard

    Public Defender: Ondo, Adam J.

    09/01/2023 Court Minutes

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    09/01/2023 Waiver of Extradition

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    09/01/2023 Order

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    Comment
    Re: Extradition

    09/01/2023 Notice of Remote Hearing

    09/13/2023 Motion to Dismiss

    09/15/2023 Order of Dismissal

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    09/15/2023 Dismissed Before Trial Or Hearing

    09/15/2023 Case Closed

    09/22/2023 Status Conference

    Judicial Officer
    Harmer, Benjamin D.

    Hearing Time
    8:15 AM

    Cancel Reason
    Vacated

    Financial

  • 4. Thomas Richard Jackson

    • 20261001
    • News article
    • Utah Department of Corrections

    More Information
    39791 THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON 10/09/1947

    Offender # Name Location Housing Facility Release Date/Type Case Manager Case Manager Email
    39791 THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON CENTRAL UTAH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY CUCF BOULDER N/A JANELLE TURNER jturner@utah.gov

  • 5. Davis County deputies excavate back yard of former police officer in search of cold case victim / VIDEO

    • 20261001
    • News article
    • KSL

    KEY TAKEAWAYS

    Davis County deputies excavated a former officer's yard for missing Nancy Baird's remains.
    Thomas Jackson, a former officer, is a person of interest in Baird's case.
    Despite no remains found, detectives continue investigating the 51-year-old disappearance mystery.

    LAYTON — A former police officer for the defunct city of East Layton has become a focal point in the unsolved disappearance of a gas station attendant 51 years ago.

    Thomas Richard Jackson, 78, served as a police officer in East Layton from April of 1975 to July of 1976. During that time, on July 4, 1975, Nancy Perry Baird vanished from a Fina-brand gas station on the side of U.S. 89. In recent years, cold case investigators from the Davis County Sheriff's Office have speculated Jackson might've been involved in Baird's disappearance.

    That suspicion even led detectives to excavate the backyard of the home where Jackson lived in 1975, searching for Baird's remains. The dig, which has not been previously reported, occurred in May of 2025.

    The disappearance of Nancy Baird was long blamed on serial killer Theodore "Ted" Bundy, though Bundy denied any knowledge of Baird prior to his execution. KSL's COLD podcast has also reported Bundy had an alibi, as Bundy was with a girlfriend 100 miles from East Layton on the day Baird was last seen.

    Baird's unsolved case and the crimes committed by former East Layton police officer Thomas "Tom" Jackson are the topic of a new season of COLD. Episode 3 of the season, which released today, details how Jackson pleaded guilty to child sex crimes in Idaho in 1996 and subsequently spent 15 years in prison. Jackson was released on parole in 2011.

    Tom Jackson's inconsistent statements about Nancy Baird

    COLD approached Jackson in April of 2023, to interview him about his role investigating the Nancy Perry Baird case. During that interview, Jackson said he'd first learned Baird was missing when he'd driven by the gas station where she worked and saw his police chief, Ray Adams, and fellow officer David Ray Anderson searching for Baird.

    Jackson told COLD he'd informed Adams and Anderson he couldn't join the search right away, as he was on his way to the county sheriff's office.

    "I says, 'I got to go into County,' and 'I'm just going there and coming right back,'" Jackson recalled. "I don't remember why I was going in [to the sheriff's office]."

    Based on a timeline of events from an official report authored by officer Anderson, Jackson's arrival at the scene of Baird's disappearance would've occurred at approximately 7:30 p.m., after Baird had been missing for about two hours. It is likely the county offices were closed at this time, as it was after business hours on a federal holiday.

    Later in Jackson's interview with COLD, he made a contradictory statement that implied he was present five minutes prior to when Baird was presumably abducted from her workplace.

    "I wished I would've had some kind of a inclination to stick around five minutes," Jackson said. "I would've loved to have caught somebody doing that."

    Lie detector for former officer Tom Jackson

    COLD published portions of Jackson's interview in a podcast episode titled "The Convenient Alternative" in May of 2023. Several weeks later, detectives from the Davis County Sheriff's Office and Layton Police Department visited Jackson at his residence in Idaho. Jackson at that time consented to speak with investigators and to submit to a polygraph examination about the Baird case.

    A partial recording of that interrogation obtained by COLD through an open records request showed Jackson denied any involvement in Baird's disappearance. Jackson said he expected to learn the truth of what'd happened to her in the afterlife.

    "I'm looking forward to seeing Nancy," Jackson said. "I didn't do that to her. I wouldn't do that to her. I couldn't do murder-type things."

    During the polygraph examination, Jackson repeatedly answered "no" when asked if he'd physically caused Baird's disappearance, if Baird was dead or dying the last time he'd seen her, or if he could take investigators to Baird's body.

    Detectives also questioned Jackson about instances of child sex abuse he'd allegedly committed that were unrelated to the Baird case, including some where Jackson's own daughters were victims. KSL does not typically identify victims of child sex abuse, however Jackson's daughters have given KSL permission to reveal their identities.

    A detective subsequently told Jackson he did not believe Jackson was fully honest in his answers.

    A police hunch about Nancy Baird's gravesite

    Police suspicion about Jackson peaked in May of 2025, when the Davis County Sheriff's Office visited the home where Jackson lived at the time Baird was last seen.

    "We were working off a hunch, initially, to be quite honest," investigative Sgt. Ryan Kirkman said.

    That "hunch" being Baird's remains might be buried in Jackson's former backyard. Detectives had already searched the yard with the assistance of human remains detection canines, otherwise known as cadaver dogs. In a search warrant affidavit, Sgt. Kirkman wrote the dog handlers observed "alert behavior" in one particular portion of the yard.

    Davis County then brought in a private contractor to conduct a ground-penetrating radar, or GPR, survey of the yard. The contractor identified a subsurface "void" in the same general area where the dogs had shown their alert behavior. Kirkman presented those circumstances to a judge and requested a search warrant, which would allow detectives to excavate the "void."

    "We ended up ultimately getting a search warrant and digging quite a large hole," Kirkman said in a recent interview for COLD. "Nothing came of that."

    Detectives did not locate any trace of human remains. The suspected void turned out to be a false positive.

    Kirkman said he later told Jackson about digging in Jackson's former backyard.

    "He didn't really care either way that we were back there," Kirkman said. "We've since ruled out the possibility that his former residence could be involved."

    Tom Jackson is a 'person of interest'

    The disappointing outcome of Davis County's excavation has not cleared Jackson of suspicion in the Nancy Baird case.

    "I would classify him as a person of interest," Kirkman said.

    Jackson is not the only person of interest, however. Detectives have also speculated about the possible involvement of other members of the former East Layton Police Department, including Jackson's former colleague, David Anderson.

    "We have various theories about what we think may have happened," Kirkman said. "We're working off those. This case is still very active."

    Kirkman and his team are continuing to seek information about the whereabouts of Baird's remains, in hopes of solving the 51-year-old mystery of her disappearance and providing answers to Baird's son, Brant Baird.

    "That's the end goal of this, is to find Nancy," Kirkman said. "I think there's still some people out there that probably have information that they haven't come forward with."

    Those could include former associates of Jackson, or others who were aware of goings-on in the East Layton community during the summer when Nancy Baird disappeared. Jackson himself is currently incarcerated and has not responded to a request for comment from COLD.

    "Recently, we have received some information that leads us to two additional sites that we're currently looking at," Kirkman said. "We will put the work in necessary to solving this case."

  • 6. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON, Defendant / Case No. [86 CR 430] [CR 5415]

    • 19861008
    • News article
    • Cold Podcast/ Utah Court Records

    PAGE 1: BIND-OVER ORDER

    [Stamp:] FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE, DAVIS COUNTY, UTAH
    1986 OCT -8 PM 2:51
    MICHAEL G. ALLPHIN, CLERK, 2ND DISTRICT COURT
    BY ________ DEPUTY CLERK

    Fourth Circuit Court, State of Utah
    Layton Department

    THE STATE OF UTAH, Plaintiff
    vs.
    THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON, Defendant
    DOB 10-09-47
    36 South Angel [partly illegible]
    Layton, Utah

    BIND-OVER ORDER
    (Preliminary Examination Waived)
    Case No. [86 CR 430]
    [CR 5415]

    INFORMATION FILED ON: August 20, 1986
    FIRST APPEARANCE HEARING HELD ON: August 22, 1986
    PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION WAIVED ON: October 2, 1986
    Appearing for State of Utah: Carvel Harward
    Appearing for Defendant: Steve Vanderlinden
    CRIME CHARGED: SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD:(76-5-404 UCA) a felony of the second [text cut off at page edge]

    Defendant appeared and requested that the Preliminary Examination be waived. The court again advised defendant of the purpose of the preliminary examination. After consulting with counsel, defendant in open court requested that preliminary examination be waived and that he/she be bound over to the District Court to answer the crime charged. The prosecuting attorney thereupon consented to the waiver. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant be bound over to answer said charge in the Second Judicial District Court in and for Davis County, State of Utah.

    BAIL: Released O.R.

    Date: October [2], 1986
    [Signature: K. Roger Bean]
    Circuit Judge

    This order and all pleadings in and records made of the proceedings in this case (except tapes number [4185] which have been retained subject to the order of the District Court) transmitted to the Clerk of the District Court [October 3] 19[86] by the undersigned.

    [Signature, illegible]
    Chief Clerk/Deputy Clerk

    Case File [barcode] CD19501979
    861705415 JACKSON, THOMAS RICHARD
    D

    ---

    PAGE 2: ARRAIGNMENT FORM

    STATE OF UTAH [✓]
    LAYTON CITY ( )
    vs.
    [Richard Jackson], Defendant
    Defendant's Address ________ Phone ________ DOB ________

    TAPE NO. [41__, partly obscured]
    START DIGIT NO. [1525]
    END DIGIT NO. ________
    ARRAIGNMENT
    CASE NO. [86 CR 430]
    Judge K. Roger Bean

    [Handwritten above dashed line: (illegible)]

    [✓] Defendant appeared before the Court (under arrest) with/without an attorney ________
    ( ) Defendant was given a copy of the Information (or citation).
    ( ) Defendant ( ) requested ( ) waived formal Information.
    ( ) Information (or citation) was read to the defendant.
    ( ) The maximum penalty under the law that could be imposed for this offense.
    [✓] Defendant was given an information sheet containing his rights.
    ( ) Defendant was advised of the following legal rights, to-wit:
    ( ) The right against self-incrimination.
    ( ) The right to be represented by an attorney.
    ( ) The right to request a court appointed attorney if you are unable to pay for your own attorney.
    ( ) The right to enter a plea of guilty, not guilty or no contest.
    ( ) The right to a jury trial.
    ( ) The right to subpoena witnesses.
    ( ) The right to confront and cross-examine prosecution witnesses.
    ( ) The right to appeal to the District Court.
    ( ) Defendant requested a continuance to consult an attorney.
    ( ) Defendant waived his right to an attorney.
    ( ) Defendant requested a court appointed attorney.*
    ( ) Court appointed counsel ( ) Denied ( ) Granted ________ ( ) Advised
    ( ) Arraignment is continued to ________
    ( ) The Court explained the defendant's waiver of rights on a guilty plea.
    [✓] CHARGE [Sexual Abuse of Child] ( ) Guilty ( ) Not Guilty
    ( ) CHARGE ________ ( ) Guilty ( ) Not Guilty
    ( ) CHARGE ________ ( ) Guilty ( ) Not Guilty
    ( ) CHARGE ________ ( ) Guilty ( ) Not Guilty
    ( ) CHARGE ________ ( ) Guilty ( ) Not Guilty
    ( ) The Court verified that defendant's plea was free of coercion.
    ( ) Defendant was referred to AP&P. Sentence continued to ________.
    [✓ PE] Trial set [9-5-86 2:00 P.M.] ( ) Defendant is ordered to Appear. ( ) Bond Cont.
    [✓] Bail is set at $ [O.R.] Cash/Property ________.
    ( ) Cash/Bail Bond is posted in the amount of $ ________ Trust No. ________
    ( ) See attachment for sentence.

    [Right margin, handwritten: "Conditional upon surrender of [illegible] ... [illegible] from [illegible] ... D will retain an attorney"]

    DATE [8-22-86]
    CLERK [initials, illegible]

    ---

    PAGE 3: INFORMATION

    LOREN D. MARTIN
    Davis County Attorney
    Memorial Courthouse Building
    Farmington, Utah 84025

    [Stamp:] FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE, DAVIS COUNTY, UTAH
    1986 OCT -8 PM 2:51
    MICHAEL G. ALLPHIN, CLERK, 2ND DISTRICT COURT
    BY ________ DEPUTY CLERK

    IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF DAVIS COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH
    LAYTON DEPARTMENT
    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DAVIS COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH

    THE STATE OF UTAH, Plaintiff,
    v.
    THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON, Defendant.
    Bail ________
    INFORMATION
    No. [CR 5415]

    The undersigned affiant, Heinz Schuessler, under oath states on information and belief that the defendant, on or about May and June, 1986, at County of Davis, State of Utah, committed the crime of:

    SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD (76-5-404.1 UCA), a felony of the second degree, as follows: That at the time and place aforesaid, the defendant did take indecent liberties with [REDACTED] or did cause them to take indecent liberties with him with intent to arouse or gratify his sexual desire.

    This Information is based on evidence obtained from the following witnesses: Heinz Schuessler, [REDACTED], and [REDACTED].

    [Signature: H. Schuessler]
    Affiant

    Screened by: Carvel R. Harward
    Assigned to: Carvel R. Harward

    Authorized for presentment and filing:
    [Signature: Carvel R. Harward]
    Prosecuting Attorney

    Subscribed and sworn to before me this [20th] day of [Aug.] 1986.
    [Signature: K. Roger Bean]
    Judge

    This offense carries a possible maximum penalty of one to fifteen years imprisonment and/or up to $10,000 fine.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 4: MINUTE ENTRY, OCTOBER 14, 1986

    In the District Court of the Second Judicial District
    IN AND FOR THE
    County of Davis, State of Utah

    STATE OF UTAH, Plaintiff
    vs.
    THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON, Defendant

    MINUTE ENTRY
    Date: October 14, 1986
    Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge
    Nancy Davis, Reporter
    Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Arraignment. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff. The defendant is present and represented by Steven Vanderlinden.
    The defendant is informed of his rights by the court.
    The defendant is given a copy of the information and it is read aloud by the clerk.
    The charge is sexual abuse of a child, second degree.
    The defendant enters a plea of guilty.
    This matter is set for sentence on November 10, 1986. Adult Probation and Parole will provide the court with a pre-sentence report.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 5: SENTENCE (PAGE 1 OF FORM)

    [Stamp:] FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE, DAVIS COUNTY, UTAH
    1986 NOV 14 PM 3:01
    MICHAEL G. ALLPHIN, CLERK, 2ND DISTRICT COURT
    BY [initials] DEPUTY CLERK

    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DAVIS COUNTY
    STATE OF UTAH

    STATE OF UTAH, Plaintiff,
    vs.
    [Thomas Richard Jackson], Defendant.
    SENTENCE
    Case No. [5415]

    Charge: [Sexual abuse of a child], a felony of the [2nd] degree.

    [11-10-86] 1. (Prison) Sentence: The Defendant is sentenced to the Utah State Prison for an indeterminate term of [0-5] years, fined $[1,500], plus surcharge of $[—] and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $ [as required for counseling for victims].
    The following special conditions are ordered:
    [✓] a. The prison term is stayed on satisfactory completion of probation. (Formal) ([Informal struck through])
    ___ b. The defendant is ordered to spend ____ (days) (months) in the Davis County Jail.
    [✓] c. $[1,500] of the fine is suspended on satisfactory completion of probation.
    ___ d. The defendant is ordered to spend ____ (days) (months) (as long as required) in ________ halfway house or drug treatment house.

    [Left margin, handwritten: "Consider 402 at end of probation"]

    Charge: ________, a class ___ misdemeanor.
    ___ 2. (Jail) Sentence: The Defendant is sentenced to the Davis County Jail for a term of ____ (days)(months), fined $____, plus surcharge of $____, and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $____.
    ___ a. ____ (days) (months) of the jail term is suspended on satisfactory completion of probation. (Formal) (Informal)
    ___ b. $____ of the fine is suspended on satisfactory completion of probation.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 6: SENTENCE (PAGE 2 OF FORM)

    ___ 3. Evaluation by Division of Corrections: The Defendant is ordered committed to the Division of Corrections for a ____ day evaluation.
    ___ 4. Evaluation by Utah State Hospital: The defendant is ordered committed to the Utah State Hospital for a ____ day psychiatric evaluation.
    ___ 5. Contempt of Court Sentence: The Defendant is fined $____ and sentenced to the Davis County Jail for ____ days, with ____ days of the jail term suspended on satisfactory completion of probation.

    [11-10-86] 6. The following special conditions of probation are imposed upon the Defendant:
    ___ a. The fine is to be paid through the Clerk of the Court.
    ___ b. Restitution is to be paid through the Clerk of the Court.
    [✓] c. No violations of law.
    ___ d. No consumption of alcohol or alcoholic beverages
    ___ e. No use or possession of controlled substances
    ___ f. Submit to search of person, premises or vehicles and seizure of any evidence without a search warrant at the request of a probation officer or police officer.
    ___ g. Take chemical testing upon request.
    ___ h. No association with known drug users.
    [✓] i. Take Davis County Mental Health counseling or other mental health counseling. [Also Parents United]
    ___ j. Davis County Alcohol & Drug Program or other alcohol or drug treatment program.
    ___ k. Maintain full time employment.
    ___ l. Become involved in an educational/vocational training program.
    ___ m. No living with a person of the opposite sex without being married.
    [✓] n. (Other) [200 hours of community service approved by the court].

    ___ 7. The Defendant is ordered to pay $____ to the Clerk of the Court on or before the first Tuesday of each month beginning in the month of ________ 19__, or appear in court on the first Tuesday of any month at 9:00 A.M. when a payment is due and not paid.

    [Signature: Douglas L. Cornaby]
    Judge

    ---

    PAGE 7: MINUTE ENTRY, NOVEMBER 10, 1986

    In the District Court of the Second Judicial District, in and for the County of Davis, State of Utah
    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    MINUTE ENTRY, Date: November 10, 1986, Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge; Nancy Davis, Reporter; Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Sentence. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff. The defendant is present and represented by Steven Vanderlinden.
    Mr. Vanderlinden makes statements to the court.
    The defendant is sentenced to the Utah State Prison for an indeterminate term of 0 to 5 years, fined $1,500 and ordered to pay for any counseling costs required for the victims as restitution. The prison term and fine are suspended on satisfactory completion of probation. The following conditions of probation are imposed on the defendant: No violations of law. Take Davis County Mental Health counseling and Parents United. Complete 200 hours of community service. The community service is to be approved by the court.
    This matter is continued to February 10, 1987 for further report.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 8: MINUTE ENTRY, FEBRUARY 10, 1987

    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    MINUTE ENTRY, Date: February 10, 1987, Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge; Nancy Davis, Reporter; Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Report. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff.
    Susan Wilson, Adult Probation and Parole, represents to the court that the defendant completed 200 hours of community service. The defendant is attending Parent's United and Davis County Mental Health counseling regularly.
    This matter is continued to May 12, 1987 for further report.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 9: MINUTE ENTRY, MAY 12, 1987

    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    MINUTE ENTRY, Date: May 12, 1987, Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge; Nancy Davis, Reporter; Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Report. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff.
    Shelley Brophy, Adult Probation and Parole, represents to the court that the defendant is working. The defendant is attending Parents United and is in private therapy. There was not a fine or restitution in this matter.
    This matter is continued to November 10, 1987 for further report.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 10: MINUTE ENTRY, NOVEMBER 10, 1987

    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    MINUTE ENTRY, Date: November 10, 1987, Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge; Nancy Davis, Reporter; Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Report. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff.
    Shelley Brophy, Adult Probation and Parole, represents to the court that the defendant has completed 200 hours of community service. The defendant is looking for work in Arizona and Adult Probation and Parole may ask for Interstate Compact at a later time. The defendant is attending Parent's United.
    This matter is continued to February 16, 1988 for further report.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 11: MINUTE ENTRY, FEBRUARY 16, 1988

    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    MINUTE ENTRY, Date: February 16, 1988, Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge; Nancy Davis, Reporter; Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Report. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff.
    Gary Thompson, Adult Probation and Parole, represents to the court that the defendant has been on probation for approximately 15 months. The defendant is on Interstate Compact with Arizona. The defendant is mailing his monthly reports. The defendant completed counseling with Davis County Mental Health and Family Services and is still involved with Parent's United. The defendant is employed and completed 200 hours of Community Service.
    This matter is continued to June 14, 1988 for further report.

    FILMED

    ---

    PAGE 12: MINUTE ENTRY, JUNE 14, 1988

    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS RICHARD JACKSON
    MINUTE ENTRY, Date: June 14, 1988, Case No. 5415
    DOUGLAS L CORNABY, Judge; Jim Jones, Reporter; Kathy Potts, Clerk

    This matter comes before the Court for Report. Carvel Harward is present as counsel for the plaintiff.
    Kent Archibald, Adult Probation and Parole, represents to the court that the defendant has been on probation for 19 months. The defendant has completed 200 hours of community service, therapy through Davis County Mental Health and treatment through Family Services and Parent's United. The defendant is living in Arizona. Mr. Archibald would recommend termination of probation.
    The court will grant termination of probation.

  • 7. STATE v. JACKSON Supreme Court of Idaho.

    • 19970724
    • News article
    • Casemine

    STATE v. JACKSON
    Supreme Court of Idaho.
    Jul 24, 1997
    Subsequent
    References
    CaseIQ
    (AI Recommendations)

    SILAK, Justice.

    This is a review of a sentence and an order denying an I.C.R. 35 motion. Thomas Richard Jackson (Jackson) pled guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under sixteen, specifically, his stepdaughters. After hearing evidence, including that Jackson had been convicted in Utah of sexually molesting his biological daughters, the district court sentenced Jackson to a determinate sentence of life in prison, and denied a subsequent Rule 35 motion. Jackson appeals his sentence and the denial of his Rule 35 motion. Jackson argues that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing, and that the prosecution's alleged failure to follow the plea agreement by not affirmatively recommending retained jurisdiction amounted to fundamental error.

    I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE

    Jackson was originally charged with two counts of lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen, Idaho Code § 18-1508. Jackson entered into a plea agreement, under which Jackson plead guilty to one charge of lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen. The State also agreed to make the following sentence recommendation:

    The State recommends the above-named defendant be sentenced to an underlying penitentiary sentence with no agreements as to the recommendation for the underlying sentence; and that the State will recommend that the Court retain jurisdiction; however, the State does not bind itself to follow the recommendations of the 180-day review report.

    The charges against Jackson stemmed from several instances of lewd conduct involving Jackson and two of his stepdaughters, who were seven and nine at the time of the sentencing hearing. The abuse had been occurring for approximately two years. The first instances of abuse involved Jackson having the victims touch his penis, and escalated to the point where Jackson would have the victims sit on his penis and move back and forth. The victims were always dressed, and there was a blanket between Jackson and the victims. In addition, there were never any instances of penetration of any type, and Jackson made no threats of violence to his victims. The only threat he made was a comment that if the girls told what he had done, he would have to leave. There is one other related charge in Jackson's record. In 1986, Jackson was convicted in Utah of sexual abuse of a child, specifically, his biological daughters. He received probation and was required to perform 20 hours of community service and undergo counseling.

    After hearing testimony from Jackson's biological daughters, his stepdaughters, and his first wife; reviewing the presentence investigation materials; and listening to argument from the attorneys on both sides, the district court sentenced Jackson to a fixed term of life in prison, without a retained jurisdiction period. At the time the judgment of conviction was entered and the sentence imposed, Jackson was 48 years of age.

    II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

    Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion. Our standard of review of a sentence, as well as the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence, are well-established. We have said that "[w]here a sentence is within statutory limits, an appellant has the burden of showing a clear abuse of discretion on the part of the court imposing the sentence." State v. Cotton, 100 Idaho 573, 577, 602 P.2d 71, 75 (1979). In determining whether the sentencing court abused its discretion, we review all the facts and circumstances of the case. State v. Broadhead, 120 Idaho 141, 143, 814 P.2d 401, 403 (1991). In order to show an abuse of discretion, the defendant must show that in light of the governing criteria, the sentence was excessive, considering any view of the facts. Id. at 145, 814 P.2d at 405. The governing criteria, or objectives of criminal punishment are: "`(1) protection of society; (2) deterrence of the individual and the public generally; (3) the possibility of rehabilitation; and (4) punishment or retribution for wrongdoing.'" Id. (quoting State v. Wolfe, 99 Idaho 382, 384, 582 P.2d 728, 730 (1978)).

    III. THE DISTRICT COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN SENTENCING JACKSON TO A FIXED TERM OF LIFE IN PRISON.

    As noted above, this Court reviews a sentence handed down by a district court for abuse of discretion. It is not often that we vacate and modify a sentence, but for the reasons discussed below, we feel compelled to do so in this case.

    A fixed or determinate life sentence is a serious penalty, and should not be imposed lightly. We note with approval the language of our Court of Appeals when it stated that:

    a fixed life sentence may be deemed reasonable if the offense is so egregious that it demands an exceptionally severe measure of retribution and deterrence, or if the offender so utterly lacks rehabilitative potential that imprisonment until death is the only feasible means of protecting society. Unfortunately, in making these determinations, a judge has complete information only in regard to retribution and deterrence, . . . The judge must attempt to predict the defendant's future response to rehabilitative programs and the degree of risk he might pose to society if eventually released. . . .

    State v. Eubank, 114 Idaho 635, 638, 759 P.2d 926, 929 (Ct.App. 1988). Although it recognized the difficulty of predicting future behavior, the Court of Appeals also wisely cautioned that:

    a fixed sentence should not be regarded as a judicial hedge against uncertainty. To the contrary, a fixed life term, with its rigid preclusion of parole or good time, should be regarded as a sentence requiring a high degree of certainty — certainty that the nature of the crime demands incarceration until the perpetrator dies in prison, or certainty that the perpetrator never, at any time in his life, could be safely released.

    Id.

    This Court and the Court of Appeals have upheld some fixed life sentences for crimes involving lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen. In State v. Pugsley, 128 Idaho 168, 911 P.2d 761 (Ct.App. 1995), the defendant was sentenced to three concurrent life terms for lewd conduct. The defendant was convicted of three counts of lewd conduct with his minor biological daughter, conduct which at a minimum included genital-to-genital contact. He had been previously convicted of raping his half sister, had allegedly raped another half sister, and had threatened his daughters with death if they ever told what he had done. The defendant had an extensive criminal record, including three felonies as an adult, all of which were violent crimes. Id. at 179-80, 911 P.2d at 762-63.

    In another recent case, the Court of Appeals upheld a fixed life sentence for a man who pled guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen, as Jackson did in this case. State v. Hibbert, 127 Idaho 277, 899 P.2d 987 (Ct.App. 1995). The defendant in Hibbert had repeatedly violently attacked his minor daughter and forced her to have intercourse with him. He also kept her a virtual prisoner in their home, not allowing her to have friends, use the telephone, or go to school. During the course of the proceedings, Hibbert made death threats to his daughter, a friend and the prosecutor. Therefore, the Court of Appeals upheld the sentence. Id. at 278-79, 899 P.2d at 988-89. See also State v. Lewis, 123 Idaho 336, 352-53, 848 P.2d 394, 410-11 (1993) (upholding a fixed life sentence for a defendant who had previously been convicted for a sexual offense against a minor, attempted penetration, knew at the time of the crime that he was HIV-positive and denied he committed the crime); State v. Martinez, 111 Idaho 281, 723 P.2d 825 (1986) (upholding fixed sentences of thirty years for rape, thirty years for lewd conduct, and fifteen years for aggravated battery, which amounted to a fixed life sentence; the victim suffered extreme physical trauma requiring surgery, and it was doubtful that she would ever make a full recovery).

    Although a fixed life sentence is a serious sentence, lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen is a serious crime. The physical injures can be severe, and the mental and emotional trauma can be permanent. However, a fixed life sentence is not appropriate in every lewd and lascivious conduct case, and as illustrated above, is rendered and upheld in cases where the defendant's conduct was violent, repetitive, very cruel, or life-threatening. Phrased differently, and considering the four goals of sentencing, a fixed life sentence is appropriate if necessary to protect society, to deter the individual and the public, if rehabilitation is unlikely, or if the behavior giving rise to the crime was so egregious that a determinate life sentence is necessary for proper punishment or retribution.

    In this case, Jackson admits that he molested two of his stepdaughters, and he does have a previous conviction for similar behavior with his biological daughters. However, the behavior involved in this particular case did not involve penetration of any type, nor were there any allegations of force. Further, the record indicates that although Jackson was required to participate in some form of counseling under his prior conviction, the counseling was not part of a recognized sex-offender treatment program. This becomes important because Jackson has indicated that he wishes to undergo treatment and will cooperate in every way necessary. In addition, an evaluator indicated that the proper treatment could help prevent Jackson from re-offending. It is also significant that the appellant took full responsibility for his actions, and did not blame the victims in any way. Finally, Jackson had abstained from drugs and alcohol and had worked fairly steadily throughout his adult life.

    With any crime, there is a chance that the defendant will re-offend. Indeed, the evaluator in this case offered no guarantees that Jackson would not re-offend, even if he undergoes sexual offender treatment. However, as our Court of Appeals noted, a fixed life sentence should not be imposed as a hedge against uncertainty. The behavior exhibited in this case, while reprehensible, is not so egregious that Jackson should die in prison.

    For the reasons discussed above, and after conducting our own careful review of the record in this case, we hold that a fixed term of life in prison is excessive in this case. Considering the four goals of sentencing, we note that although society does need to be protected from sex offenders, and Jackson and the public must be deterred from such behavior, a fixed term of life in prison is not necessary to accomplish those goals. Further, Jackson has indicated that he wants to undergo treatment, has shown a desire to change his behavior and exhibits a possibility for rehabilitation. Finally, while Jackson deserves to be punished for his behavior, a fixed life term in prison is not necessary or justified in this case.

    Therefore, Jackson's sentence is hereby modified to an indeterminate life sentence with a fixed term of fifteen years in prison. When fifteen years have passed, the earliest time that Jackson would be eligible for parole, the youngest victim in this case will be over 21 years of age. Thus, the victims in this case will both be adults.

    As to the issue of the breach of the plea agreement, although it was raised as an issue in his opening brief, Jackson subsequently withdrew this issue in his brief on his Motion to Reconsider Denial of Appellant's Motion to Augment the Issues on Appeal. Accordingly, we do not reach this issue.

    IV. CONCLUSION

    In light of all the facts in this case, and considering the four goals of sentencing, we hold that Jackson has met his burden of showing that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to a fixed life sentence. We therefore modify the sentence to an indeterminate life sentence with a fifteen year fixed period of incarceration.

    JOHNSON, McDEVITT and SCHROEDER, JJ., concur.

    Chief Justice TROUT, dissenting from the Court's opinion.

    I write only to indicate that I believe that the trial court is in the best position to make the determination of the appropriate sentence. Where the record reflects that the sentencing judge carefully considered the evidence and statements presented to him and the four goals of sentencing, this Court should set aside the sentence only where reasonable minds could not differ as to the excessiveness of the sentence. State v. Broadhead, 120 Idaho 141, 145, 814 P.2d 401, 405 (1991) (quoting State v. Small, 107 Idaho 504, 505, 690 P.2d 1336, 1337 (1984), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Brown, 121 Idaho 385, 393, 825 P.2d 482, 490 (1992)). This Court should not substitute its judgment for that of the sentencing judge where reasonable minds could differ as to whether the sentence is necessary to achieve the four goals of sentencing. Id., 120 Idaho at 145, 814 P.2d at 405 (quoting State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct.App. 1982)). The record here reflects that the trial judge carefully considered the heinous nature of the offense, the devastating impact on the victims, and the fact that Jackson had previously been convicted of this offense, as well as society's need to be protected from this type of predator. I find no abuse of discretion and, thus, must respectfully dissent.

  • 8. STATE v. JACKSON (1997) Supreme Court of Idaho. STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Thomas Richard JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.

    • 19970409
    • News article
    • Caselaw

    STATE v. JACKSON (1997)
    Supreme Court of Idaho.

    STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Thomas Richard JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 22892.
    Decided: April 09, 1997
    Byington, Holloway, Whipple & Jones, Jerome, for appellant. Alan G. Lance, Attorney General;  L. LaMont Anderson, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

    This is a review of a sentence and an order denying an I.C.R. 35 motion.   Thomas Richard Jackson (Jackson) pled guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under sixteen, specifically, his stepdaughters.   After hearing evidence, including that Jackson had been convicted in Utah of sexually molesting his biological daughters, the district court sentenced Jackson to a determinate sentence of life in prison, and denied a subsequent Rule 35 motion.   Jackson appeals his sentence and the denial of his Rule 35 motion.   Jackson argues that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing, and that the prosecution's alleged failure to follow the plea agreement by not affirmatively recommending retained jurisdiction amounted to fundamental error.

    I.

    FACTS AND PROCEDURE

    Jackson was originally charged with two counts of lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen, Idaho Code § 18-1508.   Jackson entered into a plea agreement, under which Jackson plead guilty to one charge of lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen.   The State also agreed to make the following sentence recommendation:

    The State recommends the above-named defendant be sentenced to an underlying penitentiary sentence with no agreements as to the recommendation for the underlying sentence;  and that the State will recommend that the Court retain jurisdiction;  however, the State does not bind itself to follow the recommendations of the 180-day review report.

    The charges against Jackson stemmed from several instances of lewd conduct involving Jackson and two of his stepdaughters, who were seven and nine at the time of the sentencing hearing.   The abuse had been occurring for approximately two years.   The first instances of abuse involved Jackson having the victims touch his penis, and escalated to the point where Jackson would have the victims sit on his penis and move back and forth.   The victims were always dressed, and there was a blanket between Jackson and the victims.   In addition, there were never any instances of penetration of any type, and Jackson made no threats of violence to his victims.   The only threat he made was a comment that if the girls told what he had done, he would have to leave.   There is one other related charge in Jackson's record.   In 1986, Jackson was convicted in Utah of sexual abuse of a child, specifically, his biological daughters.   He received probation and was required to perform 20 hours of community service and undergo counseling.

    After hearing testimony from Jackson's biological daughters, his stepdaughters, and his first wife;  reviewing the presentence investigation materials;  and listening to argument from the attorneys on both sides, the district court sentenced Jackson to a fixed term of life in prison, without a retained jurisdiction period.   At the time the judgment of conviction was entered and the sentence imposed, Jackson was 48 years of age.

    II.

    STANDARD OF REVIEW

    Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion.   Our standard of review of a sentence, as well as the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence, are well-established.   We have said that “[w]here a sentence is within statutory limits, an appellant has the burden of showing a clear abuse of discretion on the part of the court imposing the sentence.”  State v. Cotton, 100 Idaho 573, 577, 602 P.2d 71, 75 (1979).   In determining whether the sentencing court abused its discretion, we review all the facts and circumstances of the case.  State v. Broadhead, 120 Idaho 141, 143, 814 P.2d 401, 403 (1991).   In order to show an abuse of discretion, the defendant must show that in light of the governing criteria, the sentence was excessive, considering any view of the facts.  Id. at 145, 814 P.2d at 405.   The governing criteria, or objectives of criminal punishment are:  “ ‘(1) protection of society;  (2) deterrence of the individual and the public generally;  (3) the possibility of rehabilitation;  and (4) punishment or retribution for wrongdoing.’ ”  Id. (quoting State v. Wolfe, 99 Idaho 382, 384, 582 P.2d 728, 730 (1978)).

    III.

    THE DISTRICT COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN SENTENCING JACKSON TO A FIXED TERM OF LIFE IN PRISON.

     As noted above, this Court reviews a sentence handed down by a district court for abuse of discretion.   It is not often that we vacate and modify a sentence, but for the reasons discussed below, we feel compelled to do so in this case.

    A fixed or determinate life sentence is a serious penalty, and should not be imposed lightly.   We note with approval the language of our Court of Appeals when it stated that:

    a fixed life sentence may be deemed reasonable if the offense is so egregious that it demands an exceptionally severe measure of retribution and deterrence, or if the offender so utterly lacks rehabilitative potential that imprisonment until death is the only feasible means of protecting society.   Unfortunately, in making these determinations, a judge has complete information only in regard to retribution and deterrence, ․ The judge must attempt to predict the defendant's future response to rehabilitative programs and the degree of risk he might pose to society if eventually released․

    State v. Eubank, 114 Idaho 635, 638, 759 P.2d 926, 929 (Ct.App.1988).   Although it recognized the difficulty of predicting future behavior, the Court of Appeals also wisely cautioned that:

    a fixed sentence should not be regarded as a judicial hedge against uncertainty.   To the contrary, a fixed life term, with its rigid preclusion of parole or good time, should be regarded as a sentence requiring a high degree of certainty-certainty that the nature of the crime demands incarceration until the perpetrator dies in prison, or certainty that the perpetrator never, at any time in his life, could be safely released.

    Id.

    This Court and the Court of Appeals have upheld some fixed life sentences for crimes involving lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen.   In State v. Pugsley, 128 Idaho 168, 911 P.2d 761 (Ct.App.1995), the defendant was sentenced to three concurrent life terms for lewd conduct.   The defendant was convicted of three counts of lewd conduct with his minor biological daughter, conduct which at a minimum included genital-to-genital contact.   He had been previously convicted of raping his half sister, had allegedly raped another half sister, and had threatened his daughters with death if they ever told what he had done.   The defendant had an extensive criminal record, including three felonies as an adult, all of which were violent crimes.  Id. at 179-80, 911 P.2d at 762-63.

    In another recent case, the Court of Appeals upheld a fixed life sentence for a man who pled guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen, as Jackson did in this case.  State v. Hibbert, 127 Idaho 277, 899 P.2d 987 (Ct.App.1995).   The defendant in Hibbert had repeatedly violently attacked his minor daughter and forced her to have intercourse with him.   He also kept her a virtual prisoner in their home, not allowing her to have friends, use the telephone, or go to school.   During the course of the proceedings, Hibbert made death threats to his daughter, a friend and the prosecutor.   Therefore, the Court of Appeals upheld the sentence.  Id. at 278-79, 899 P.2d at 988-89.   See also State v. Lewis, 123 Idaho 336, 352-53, 848 P.2d 394, 410-11 (1993) (upholding a fixed life sentence for a defendant who had previously been convicted for a sexual offense against a minor, attempted penetration, knew at the time of the crime that he was HIV-positive and denied he committed the crime);  State v. Martinez, 111 Idaho 281, 723 P.2d 825 (1986) (upholding fixed sentences of thirty years for rape, thirty years for lewd conduct, and fifteen years for aggravated battery, which amounted to a fixed life sentence;  the victim suffered extreme physical trauma requiring surgery, and it was doubtful that she would ever make a full recovery).

     Although a fixed life sentence is a serious sentence, lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen is a serious crime.   The physical injures can be severe, and the mental and emotional trauma can be permanent.   However, a fixed life sentence is not appropriate in every lewd and lascivious conduct case, and as illustrated above, is rendered and upheld in cases where the defendant's conduct was violent, repetitive, very cruel, or life-threatening.   Phrased differently, and considering the four goals of sentencing, a fixed life sentence is appropriate if necessary to protect society, to deter the individual and the public, if rehabilitation is unlikely, or if the behavior giving rise to the crime was so egregious that a determinate life sentence is necessary for proper punishment or retribution.

    In this case, Jackson admits that he molested two of his stepdaughters, and he does have a previous conviction for similar behavior with his biological daughters.   However, the behavior involved in this particular case did not involve penetration of any type, nor were there any allegations of force.   Further, the record indicates that although Jackson was required to participate in some form of counseling under his prior conviction, the counseling was not part of a recognized sex-offender treatment program.   This becomes important because Jackson has indicated that he wishes to undergo treatment and will cooperate in every way necessary.   In addition, an evaluator indicated that the proper treatment could help prevent Jackson from re-offending.   It is also significant that the appellant took full responsibility for his actions, and did not blame the victims in any way.   Finally, Jackson had abstained from drugs and alcohol and had worked fairly steadily throughout his adult life.

    With any crime, there is a chance that the defendant will re-offend.   Indeed, the evaluator in this case offered no guarantees that Jackson would not re-offend, even if he undergoes sexual offender treatment.   However, as our Court of Appeals noted, a fixed life sentence should not be imposed as a hedge against uncertainty.   The behavior exhibited in this case, while reprehensible, is not so egregious that Jackson should die in prison.

    For the reasons discussed above, and after conducting our own careful review of the record in this case, we hold that a fixed term of life in prison is excessive in this case.   Considering the four goals of sentencing, we note that although society does need to be protected from sex offenders, and Jackson and the public must be deterred from such behavior, a fixed term of life in prison is not necessary to accomplish those goals.   Further, Jackson has indicated that he wants to undergo treatment, has shown a desire to change his behavior and exhibits a possibility for rehabilitation.   Finally, while Jackson deserves to be punished for his behavior, a fixed life term in prison is not necessary or justified in this case.

    Therefore, Jackson's sentence is hereby modified to an indeterminate life sentence with a fixed term of fifteen years in prison.   When fifteen years have passed, the earliest time that Jackson would be eligible for parole, the youngest victim in this case will be over 21 years of age.   Thus, the victims in this case will both be adults.

    As to the issue of the breach of the plea agreement, although it was raised as an issue in his opening brief, Jackson subsequently withdrew this issue in his brief on his Motion to Reconsider Denial of Appellant's Motion to Augment the Issues on Appeal.   Accordingly, we do not reach this issue.

    IV.

    CONCLUSION

    In light of all the facts in this case, and considering the four goals of sentencing, we hold that Jackson has met his burden of showing that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to a fixed life sentence.   We therefore modify the sentence to an indeterminate life sentence with a fifteen year fixed period of incarceration.

    I write only to indicate that I believe that the trial court is in the best position to make the determination of the appropriate sentence.   Where the record reflects that the sentencing judge carefully considered the evidence and statements presented to him and the four goals of sentencing, this Court should set aside the sentence only where reasonable minds could not differ as to the excessiveness of the sentence.  State v. Broadhead, 120 Idaho 141, 145, 814 P.2d 401, 405 (1991) (quoting State v. Small, 107 Idaho 504, 505, 690 P.2d 1336, 1337 (1984), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Brown, 121 Idaho 385, 393, 825 P.2d 482, 490 (1992)).   This Court should not substitute its judgment for that of the sentencing judge where reasonable minds could differ as to whether the sentence is necessary to achieve the four goals of sentencing.  Id., 120 Idaho at 145, 814 P.2d at 405 (quoting State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct.App.1982)).   The record here reflects that the trial judge carefully considered the heinous nature of the offense, the devastating impact on the victims, and the fact that Jackson had previously been convicted of this offense, as well as society's need to be protected from this type of predator.   I find no abuse of discretion and, thus, must respectfully dissent.

    SILAK, Justice.

    JOHNSON, McDEVITT and SCHROEDER, JJ., concur.

  • 9. Thomas Richard Jackson / INCARCERATED

    • 19960404
    • News article
    • Utah Department of Public Safety

    Name: Thomas Richard JACKSON Registration #: 31873718
    Aliases: Thomas R JACKSON
    Status: Incarcerated

    Physical Description
    • Age: 78 (DOB: 10/09/1947) • Height: 6'01''
    • Sex: M • Weight: 190lbs
    • Race: White • Eyes: Brown
    • Hair: White
    • Scars/Tattoos: Scar on abdomen () , Scar on Chest ()

    Address
    1480 N 8000 W SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116
    View Map
    Other Known Addresses
    Offenses
    • Description: 76-5-404.1 - SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD/2ND DEGREE FELONY
    • Date Convicted: 11/26/2025
    • Conviction State: Utah
    • Release Date:
    • Details:
    • Counts: 5
    • Description: 18-1508 - LEWD CONDUCT WITH A MINOR CHILD UNDER SIXTEEN
    • Date Convicted: 04/04/1996
    • Conviction State: Idaho
    • Release Date:
    • Details: J&C states: LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS CONDUCT WITH A CHILD UNDER THE AGE OF SIXTEEN YEARS, a Felony
    • Counts: 1
    • Description: 76-5-404.1 - SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD/2ND DEGREE FELONY
    • Date Convicted: 11/10/1986
    • Conviction State: Utah
    • Release Date:
    • Details:
    • Counts: 1

    Name: Thomas Richard JACKSON Registration #: 31873718
    Aliases: Thomas R JACKSON
    Status: Incarcerated

  • 10. STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS R JACKSON CASE NUMBER 231701597

    • 20230821
    • News article
    • Utah Court Records

    SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT - FARMINGTON DISTRICT COURT
    DAVIS COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH
    STATE OF UTAH vs. THOMAS R JACKSON
    CASE NUMBER 231701597 State Felony

    CHARGES

    Charge 1 - 76-5-404.1 - SEX ABUSE CHILD - 2nd Degree Felony
    Offense Date: May 02, 1986
    Location: Davis County
    Plea: August 28, 2025 No Contest
    Disposition: August 28, 2025 No Contest

    Charge 2 - 76-5-404.1 - SEX ABUSE CHILD - 2nd Degree Felony
    Offense Date: May 02, 1986
    Location: Davis County
    Plea: August 28, 2025 No Contest
    Disposition: August 28, 2025 No Contest

    Charge 3 - 76-5-404.1 - SEX ABUSE CHILD - 2nd Degree Felony
    Offense Date: May 02, 1986
    Location: Davis County
    Plea: August 28, 2025 No Contest
    Disposition: August 28, 2025 No Contest

    Charge 4 - 76-5-404.1 - SEX ABUSE CHILD - 2nd Degree Felony
    Offense Date: May 02, 1986
    Location: Davis County
    Plea: August 28, 2025 No Contest
    Disposition: August 28, 2025 No Contest

    Charge 5 - 76-5-404.1 - SEX ABUSE CHILD - 2nd Degree Felony
    Offense Date: May 11, 1983
    Location: Davis County
    Plea: August 28, 2025 No Contest
    Disposition: August 28, 2025 No Contest

    CURRENT ASSIGNED JUDGE
    MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PARTIES
    Plaintiff - STATE OF UTAH
    Represented by: TAMARA BASQUEZ
    Defendant - THOMAS R JACKSON
    Represented by: COLLEEN COEBERGH
    Represented by: EMILY ADAMS

    DEFENDANT INFORMATION
    Defendant Name: THOMAS R JACKSON
    Offense Tracking Number: 65672495
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 1 of 20
    Date of Birth: October 09, 1947
    Law Enforcement Agency: DAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF
    LEA Case Number: D23-08841
    Officer Name: KURT JEMMETT
    Prosecuting Agency: DAVIS COUNTY
    Agency Case Number: 23-1766
    Violation Date: 05-11-1983

    ACCOUNT SUMMARY
    Total Revenue Amount Due: 15.00
    Amount Paid: 15.00
    Amount Credit: 0.00
    Balance: 0.00
    REVENUE DETAIL - TYPE: ELEC STORAGE MEDIUM
    Amount Due: 15.00
    Amount Paid: 15.00
    Amount Credit: 0.00
    Balance: 0.00

    CASE NOTE
    DCJAIL (NO BAIL)
    PROCEEDINGS
    DATE SEQ EVENT
    08-21-2023 Case filed by efiler
    08-21-2023 Filed: From an Information
    08-21-2023 1 Filed: INFORMATION/INDICTMENT
    08-21-2023 Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA assigned.
    08-21-2023 Note: SID 273995 ATTACHED BY EFILING
    08-21-2023 3 Filed: Affidavit/Declaration
    08-21-2023 4 Filed: Motion for Pretrial Detention
    Filed by: STATE OF UTAH
    08-21-2023 2 Filed: Substitution of Counsel
    08-21-2023 5 Filed: Warrant of Arrest (Proposed)
    08-21-2023 6 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    08-23-2023 7 Filed order: Warrant of Arrest
    Judge MICHAEL EDWARDS
    Signed August 23, 2023
    08-23-2023 8 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    08-23-2023 WARRANT : JACKSON
    Judge: MICHAEL EDWARDS
    To any Peace Officer in the State of Utah:
    You are commanded to arrest and deliver thedefendant to the Davis County Jail.
    A juvenile may not be confined in an adult facility.
    Defendant may be transported within the state.
    The defendant must appear in Court before JudgeMICHAEL EDWARDS on the next available court date.
    Warrant in Aid of Commitment
    Court orders a non-bailable warrant to issue.
    No pre-trial service release.

    This warrant may be served any time, day or night.
    Issued: August 23, 2023
    Law Enforcement Agency: DAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF
    Defendant Details:
    THOMAS R JACKSON Citation No:
    4788B RIVER RD. Date of Birth: 10-09-1947
    Driver License No:
    BUHL ID 83316 Social Security No: xxx-xx-7753
    Home Phone:
    Vehicle License:
    Warrant Number: 985869565
    08-23-2023 WARRANT: JACKSON ,
    Judge: MICHAEL EDWARDS
    To any Peace Officer in the State of Utah:
    You are commanded to arrest and deliver thedefendant to the Davis County Jail.
    A juvenile may not be confined in an adult facility.
    Defendant may be transported within the state.
    The defendant must appear in Court before JudgeMICHAEL EDWARDS on the next available court date.
    Warrant in Aid of Commitment
    Court orders a non-bailable warrant to issue.
    No pre-trial service release.
    This warrant may be served any time, day or night.
    Issued: August 23, 2023
    Law Enforcement Agency: DAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF
    Defendant Details:
    THOMAS R JACKSON Citation No:
    4788B RIVER RD. Date of Birth: 10-09-1947
    Driver License No:
    BUHL ID 83316 Social Security No: xxx-xx-7753
    Home Phone:
    Vehicle License:
    Warrant Number: 985869565
    08-23-2023 Warrant Ordered on: August 23, 2023 Warrant Num:985869565 No Bail
    08-23-2023 Warrant Issued on: August 23, 2023 Warrant Num:985869565 No Bail
    Judge MICHAEL EDWARDS
    Issue Reason: Warrant in Aid of Commitment
    09-07-2023 INITIAL APPEARANCE scheduled on September 08, 2023 at08:59 AM in FIRST APPEARANCE with Judge ROTATION JUDGE
    09-07-2023 Warrant Recalled on : September 07, 2023 Warrant Num:985869565 No Bail
    Recall Reason: Defendant was booked
    09-07-2023 9 Filed: Motion to Classify Private
    Filed by: STATE OF UTAH
    09-07-2023 11 **** PRIVATE **** Filed: Order (Proposed) PretrialProtective Order
    09-07-2023 10 Filed: Order (Proposed) to Classify Private
    09-07-2023 12 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-07-2023 13 Filed order: Request and Order for Electronic MediaCoverage of Court Proceedings
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 3 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    Judge MICHAEL EDWARDS
    Signed September 07, 2023
    09-08-2023 14 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-08-2023 Cancelled: ARRAIGNMENT scheduled on September 21, 2023at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Reason: Correct calendar
    09-08-2023 Note: Case Bound Over
    09-08-2023 Minute Entry - BINDOVER ORDER
    Judge: MICHAEL EDWARDS
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: TREE, TERAL
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is in the custody of the Davis CountyJail
    Defendant's Attorney(s): CONDIE, SHAWN
    Clerk: oliviaml
    Tape Number: F6-09082023 Tape Count: 9:46-9:50
    INITIAL APPEARANCE
    A copy of the Information is given to the defendant.
    Defendant waives reading of Information.
    Advised of charges and penalties.
    The defendant conditionally waives the preliminaryhearing.
    HEARING
    The court will sign and enter the proposed pretrialprotective order, service is to be completed at theDavis County Jail.
    APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
    Court finds the defendant indigent and appointsCOLLEEN COEBERGH to represent the defendant.
    Appointed Counsel:
    Name: COLLEEN COEBERGH
    Address: 29 S STATE ST 7
    City: SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
    Phone: 8013643300
    This hearing is being recorded via WEBEX and FTR. CASEBOUNDOVER
    This case is bound over. An Arraignment hearing hasbeen set on 9/21/2023 at 10:00 AM remotely beforeJudge MICHAEL D DIREDA.
    CUSTODY
    The defendant is remanded to the custody of theDavis County Jail.
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely.
    Contact the court to provide your current emailaddress.
    If you do not have access to a phone or otherelectronic device to appear remotely, notify thecourt.
    09-08-2023 15 Filed order: BINDOVER ORDER
    Judge MICHAEL EDWARDS
    Signed September 08, 2023
    09-08-2023 16 Filed: Appearance of Counsel/Notice of LimitedAppearance
    09-08-2023 18 Filed: Demand for Notice of 404b Evidence
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 4 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    09-08-2023 17 Filed: Request for Discovery
    09-08-2023 19 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-08-2023 20 **** PRIVATE **** Filed order: Order Pretrial ProtectiveOrder
    09-08-2023 21 Filed order: Order to Classify Private
    Judge MICHAEL EDWARDS
    Signed September 08, 2023
    09-08-2023 22 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-08-2023 23 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-09-2023 24 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-11-2023 Note: DEF Address changed from 4788B RIVER RD. BUHL ID 83316
    09-11-2023 Note: DEF Address changed to 4788 RIVER RD. #B BUHL ID 83316
    09-11-2023 25 **** PRIVATE **** Filed: Jail Booking Record
    09-11-2023 26 **** PRIVATE **** Filed protective order: Pre-TrialProtective Order
    09-11-2023 Note: Victim's copy of PO sent to prosecutor's office
    09-11-2023 Note: Service packet sent to DCSO
    09-12-2023 27 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-12-2023 Note: Pre-Trial Protective Order Service Date : 09-12-2023 08:00:00
    09-12-2023 28 Filed return: Return of Service - PTPO
    Party Served: JACKSON, THOMAS R
    Service Type: Personal
    Service Date: September 12, 2023
    Garnishee:
    09-12-2023 29 Filed: Protective Order Firearm RestrictionAcknowledgement
    09-13-2023 30 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-13-2023 31 Filed: Request for Discovery
    09-13-2023 32 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-18-2023 Cancelled: ARRAIGNMENT scheduled on September 21, 2023at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    09-21-2023 33 Filed order: Request and Order for Electronic MediaCoverage of Court Proceedings
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed September 20, 2023
    09-21-2023 Minute Entry - CONTINUANCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: JANZEN, MATTHEW
    The defendant is in the custody of the Davis CountyJail
    Defendant not present
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: heleng
    Tape Number: F7 09212023 Tape Count: 0932-0940
    CONTINUANCE
    Whose Motion: The Defendant's counsel COLLEENCOEBERGH.
    Reason for continuance:
    Request of counsel
    The motion is granted.
    The defendant was in the medical wing, waiver ofappearance granted.
    ARRAIGNMENT is scheduled

    Date: 11/16/2023
    Time: 08:30 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely.
    Contact the court to provide your current emailaddress.
    If you do not have access to a phone or otherelectronic device to appear remotely, notify thecourt.
    09-22-2023 34 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-26-2023 Continued: ARRAIGNMENT scheduled on November 16, 2023 at08:30 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-14-2023 35 Filed: Request and Order for Electronic Media Coverageof Court Proceedings
    11-15-2023 36 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-16-2023 PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on December 28, 2023 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-16-2023 Minute Entry - ARRAIGNMENT / BAIL HEARING
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: JANZEN, MATTHEW
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is in the custody of the Davis CountyJail
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: heleng
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7 11162023 Tape Count: 0851-0927
    HEARING
    This is the time set for arraignment / bail hearing.
    Mr. Janzen addresses the court in regards to thedefendant's custody status.
    Ms. Coebergh state's rebuttal argument. Ms. Coeberghinforms the court that the defendant is on parole inthe state of Idaho.
    The defendant's current probation agent is present,and answers the courts questions.
    The court reviews the case.
    The court orders the defendant be released under thefollowing conditions; Comply with parole conditions,provide an update to the sex offender registry, beon electronic home confinement which will befacilitated by his parole agent, law abiding, attendall court appearances, do not frequent wherechildren are (schools, playgrounds, parks), grocerystore 1 x per week. The defendant will be allowed tomove back to Idaho. If the defendant violates anycondition of release his Idaho parole agent is tonotify the court and Mr. Janzen.
    PRETRIAL CONFERENCE is scheduled.
    Date: 12/28/2023
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely.
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 6 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    Contact the court to provide your current emailaddress.
    If you do not have access to a phone or otherelectronic device to appear remotely, notify thecourt.
    11-16-2023 Minute Entry - RELEASE ORDER
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Clerk: heleng
    Audio
    HEARING
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above named defendantbe released immediately from custody on the above-referenced matter.
    11-16-2023 37 Filed order: RELEASE ORDER
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed November 16, 2023
    11-17-2023 38 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-28-2023 39 Filed order: ARRAIGNMENT / BAIL HEARING
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed November 28, 2023
    11-29-2023 40 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    12-28-2023 Minute Entry - CONTINUANCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: JANZEN, MATTHEW
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: heleng
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7 12282023 Tape Count: 0845-0846
    CONTINUANCE
    Whose Motion: The Defendant's counsel COLLEENCOEBERGH.
    Reason for continuance:
    Request of counsel
    The motion is granted.
    PRETRIAL CONFERENCE is scheduled.
    Date: 02/22/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely.
    Contact the court to provide your current emailaddress.
    If you do not have access to a phone or otherelectronic device to appear remotely, notify thecourt.
    01-03-2024 Continued: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on February 22,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    02-20-2024 41 Filed: Request and Order for Electronic Media Coverageof Court Proceedings
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 7 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    02-21-2024 42 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    02-22-2024 Minute Entry - CONTINUANCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: JANZEN, MATTHEW
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: heleng
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7 02222024 Tape Count: 1014-1016
    CONTINUANCE
    Whose Motion: The Defendant's counsel COLLEENCOEBERGH.
    Reason for continuance:
    Request of counsel
    The motion is granted.
    PRETRIAL CONFERENCE is scheduled.
    Date: 04/25/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely.
    Contact the court to provide your current emailaddress.
    If you do not have access to a phone or otherelectronic device to appear remotely, notify thecourt.
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    02-27-2024 Continued: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on April 25,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    03-27-2024 43 Filed: Substitution of Counsel
    03-27-2024 44 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    04-24-2024 45 Filed: Request and Order for Electronic Media Coverageof Court Proceedings
    04-24-2024 46 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    04-25-2024 Minute Entry - CONTINUANCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: TAMARA BASQUEZ
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COLLEEN COEBERGH
    Clerk: abbyb
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-04252024 Tape Count: 9.07-9.11
    CONTINUANCE
    Whose Motion: The Defendant's counsel COLLEENCOEBERGH.
    Reason for continuance:
    Request of counsel

    Date: 12/10/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 12/11/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 12/13/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 12/16/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    05-16-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on December 09,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    Reason: Counsel's request.
    05-16-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on December 10,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    05-16-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on December 11,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    05-16-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on December 13,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    05-16-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on December 16,2024 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    05-16-2024 47 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-18-2024 NOTICE for Case 231701597 ID 25010683
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Remote Appearance
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 10 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE is scheduled.
    Date: 11/21/2024
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Courts Website: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/cal/
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely. Contact the court toprovide your current email address. If you do nothave access to a phone or other electronic device toappear remotely, notify the court.
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    11-18-2024 FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on November 21, 2024at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-18-2024 48 Filed: Notice for Case 231701597 FS Judge: MICHAEL DDIREDA
    11-19-2024 49 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-21-2024 FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on March 06, 2025 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-21-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on April 01, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-21-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on April 02, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-21-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on April 04, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-21-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on April 07, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-21-2024 Cancelled: 5 DAY JURY TRIAL scheduled on April 08, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-21-2024 Minute Entry - FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: BASQUEZ, TAMARA
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: danielsf
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-11212024 Tape Count: 1044-1056
    HEARING
    This hearing is held via Webex and recorded on FTR.
    This is the time set for a Final PretrialConference. Ms. Coebergh gives an update andrequests that the trial currently set for December9-16 be continued. The State objects.
    The court will grant the motion to continue and willreschedule the jury trial for April 1, 2, 4, 7, and8, 2025 in person.
    A final pretrial conference is set for March 6, 2025via Webex.
    Remote Appearance
    FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE is scheduled.
    Date: 03/06/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 11 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Courts Website: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/cal/
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL is scheduled.
    Date: 04/01/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 04/02/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 04/04/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 04/07/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    5 DAY JURY TRIAL.
    Date: 04/08/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely. Contact the court toprovide your current email address. If you do nothave access to a phone or other electronic device toappear remotely, notify the court.
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    11-22-2024 50 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-06-2025 51 Filed order: Request and Order for Electronic Media
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 12 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    Coverage of Court Proceedings
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed March 05, 2025
    03-07-2025 52 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-09-2025 53 Filed: Motion regarding handling of Exculpatory evidence
    Filed by: THOMAS R JACKSON
    03-09-2025 54 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-10-2025 55 Filed: Demand for Notice of 404(c) evidence
    03-10-2025 56 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-10-2025 57 Filed: Motion to continue jury trial
    Filed by: THOMAS R JACKSON
    03-10-2025 58 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-10-2025 59 Filed: Motion State s 404(c) Notice
    Filed by: STATE OF UTAH
    03-10-2025 60 Filed: Motion State s Motion for Protective Order Brady
    Filed by: STATE OF UTAH
    03-10-2025 61 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-10-2025 62 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-11-2025 63 Filed: Certification of delivery of Witness List
    03-11-2025 64 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-11-2025 65 Filed: Motion State s Objection to Defense Continuance
    Filed by: STATE OF UTAH
    03-11-2025 66 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-11-2025 FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on March 12, 2025 at08:30 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 67 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-12-2025 Cancelled: TRIAL-JURY scheduled on September 29, 2025 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 Cancelled: TRIAL-JURY scheduled on September 30, 2025 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 Cancelled: TRIAL-JURY scheduled on October 01, 2025 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 Cancelled: TRIAL-JURY scheduled on October 03, 2025 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 Cancelled: TRIAL-JURY scheduled on October 06, 2025 at09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 Cancelled: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on August 21,2025 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    03-12-2025 FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on August 21, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    03-12-2025 Minute Entry - FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: BASQUEZ, TAMARA
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: kaceep
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-03122025 Tape Count: 832-932
    HEARING
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 13 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    This hearing is held via WebEx and is recorded onFTR. This is the time set for a final pretrialconference. Court and counsel discuss the pendingmotions filed by Ms. Coebergh. Ms Coebergh waivesright to a speedy trial & requests new trial date inthe fall. Judge grants the request and sets newtrial date for Sept. 29, 30 & Oct. 1, 3 & 6. Finalpretrial conference is scheduled for Aug. 21, 2025at 9AM. Court cancels the jury trial for April 1, 2,4, 7 & 8.
    Remote Appearance
    FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE.
    Date: 08/21/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    The reason for the change is Clerk error.
    Courts Website: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/cal/
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely. Contact the court toprovide your current email address. If you do nothave access to a phone or other electronic device toappear remotely, notify the court.
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    03-13-2025 68 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    04-04-2025 69 Filed: Order (Proposed) PROTECTIVE ORDER BRADYINFORMATION
    04-04-2025 70 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    04-07-2025 Note: Information Protective Order sent to MDD for review.
    04-08-2025 71 Filed order: Order PROTECTIVE ORDER BRADY INFORMATION
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed April 08, 2025
    04-08-2025 72 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    08-20-2025 129 Filed: Media Request
    08-21-2025 Continued: FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE scheduled on August28, 2025 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL DDIREDA
    08-21-2025 Minute Entry - CONTINUANCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: BASQUEZ, TAMARA
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: madisonh
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-08212025 Tape Count: 9.43-9.44
    CONTINUANCE
    Whose Motion: The Defendant's counsel COLLEENCOEBERGH.
    Reason for continuance:
    Request of counsel
    The motion is granted.
    Remote Appearance
    FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE is scheduled.
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 14 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    Date: 08/28/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Courts Website: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/cal/
    This hearing will not take place at the courthouse.It will be conducted remotely. Contact the court toprovide your current email address. If you do nothave access to a phone or other electronic device toappear remotely, notify the court.
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    08-23-2025 73 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    08-28-2025 74 Filed: Proposed Statement in Advance of Plea
    08-28-2025 75 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    08-28-2025 Charge 1 Disposition is No Contest
    08-28-2025 Charge 2 Disposition is No Contest
    08-28-2025 Charge 3 Disposition is No Contest
    08-28-2025 Charge 4 Disposition is No Contest
    08-28-2025 Charge 5 Disposition is No Contest
    08-28-2025 Minute Entry - CHANGE OF PLEA
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: WILLOUGHBY, BENJAMIN
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: madisonh
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-08282025 Tape Count: 10.23-10.36
    Court advises defendant of rights and penalties.
    Defendant waives time for sentence.
    A pre-sentence investigation was ordered.
    The Judge orders Adult Probation and Parole toprepare a Pre-sentence report.
    Change of Plea Note
    Defendant pleads no contest to all counts ascharged. The trial date is stricken.
    In-person Appearance
    APP SENTENCING is scheduled.
    Date: 11/07/2025
    Time: 01:30 p.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    08-28-2025 79 Filed order: Request and Order for Electronic MediaCoverage of Court Proceedings
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 15 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed August 27, 2025
    08-28-2025 76 Filed: Plea, Rights and Waiver
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed August 28, 2025
    08-29-2025 77 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    08-29-2025 APP SENTENCING scheduled on November 07, 2025 at 01:30PM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    08-29-2025 Note: Pre-sentence Investigation Order Transmitted to AdultProbation and Parole
    08-29-2025 78 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    09-16-2025 80 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    10-29-2025 83 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-04-2025 84 **** PROTECTED **** Filed: Pre Sentence InvestigationReport
    11-05-2025 85 Filed: Motion to continue sentencing
    Filed by: THOMAS R JACKSON
    11-05-2025 86 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-06-2025 87 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-06-2025 88 Filed: POOL Media Request - Approved
    11-07-2025 Minute Entry - APP SENTENCING - CONTINUANCE
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: BASQUEZ, TAMARA
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: madisonh
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-11072025 Tape Count: 1.34-2.09
    CONTINUANCE
    Whose Motion: The Defendant's counsel COLLEENCOEBERGH.
    Reason for continuance:
    Request of counsel
    The motion is granted.
    HEARING
    1:36 PM Ms. Coebergh addresses the Court regardingthe motion to continue.
    1:41 PM Ms. Basquez responds.
    1:46 PM Ms. Coebergh addresses the Court regardingtaking the defendant into custody pendingsentencing.
    1:53 PM Court and counsel discuss dates for thesentencing.
    2:01 PM Ms. Basquez addresses the Court regardingtaking the defendant into custody pendingsentencing.
    2:02 PM Ms. Coebergh responds.
    2:08 PM The Court orders the defendant be taken intocustody pending sentencing. This matter is continuedto 11/26/25 at 9 AM.
    In-person Appearance
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 16 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    APP SENTENCING.
    Date: 11/26/2025
    Time: 09:00 a.m.
    Location: Courtroom 7
    Before Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    SECOND DISTRICT COURT
    800 WEST STATE STREET
    FARMINGTON, UT 84025
    UCJA Rule 4-401.02: court proceedings, includingelectronic proceedings, may NOT be recorded,photographed, or transmitted. Failure to comply withthis prohibition may be treated as contempt ofcourt, punishable by fine and time in jail.
    11-07-2025 Minute Entry - JUDICIAL HOLD ORDER
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA
    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: BASQUEZ, TAMARA
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is not in custody
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: madisonh
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-11072025
    HEARING
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-named defendantbe held in custody without bail until further orderof the court.
    11-07-2025 89 Filed order: JUDICIAL HOLD ORDER
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed November 07, 2025
    11-07-2025 90 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-10-2025 Continued: APP SENTENCING scheduled on November 26, 2025at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 7 with Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    11-10-2025 91 Filed order: APP SENTENCING - CONTINUANCE
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed November 10, 2025
    11-11-2025 92 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-13-2025 94 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-21-2025 95 Filed: victim support statement
    11-21-2025 97 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-21-2025 98 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-24-2025 99 Filed: victim support statement
    11-24-2025 100 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-25-2025 101 Filed: Motion: stipulated motion to webex appearance ofLandon Ladwig
    Filed by: THOMAS R JACKSON
    11-25-2025 102 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-25-2025 103 Filed order: Request and Order for Electronic MediaCoverage of Court Proceedings - Approved
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed November 24, 2025
    11-26-2025 104 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    11-26-2025 Minute Entry - SENTENCE, JUDGMENT, COMMITMENT PRISON
    Judge: MICHAEL D DIREDA

    PRESENT
    Prosecutor: BASQUEZ, TAMARA
    Defendant Present
    The defendant is in the custody of the Davis CountyJail
    Defendant's Attorney(s): COEBERGH, COLLEEN
    Clerk: danielsf
    Audio
    Tape Number: F7-11262025 Tape Count: 915-1112
    HEARING
    This is the time set for sentencing. This hearing isheld in person and recorded on FTR.
    9:16 AM Ms. Coebergh addresses the Court regardingthe presentence report.
    9:21 AM Comments from defendant's family to theCourt.
    9:46 AM Ms. Coebergh addressses the Court.
    9:51 AM Additional comments from a family member ofthe defendant.
    9:53 AM Ms. Coebergh resumes addressing the Court.
    10:09 AM Statements from the defendant.
    10:11 AM The Court hears statements from victims.
    10:37 AM Ms. Basquez addresses the Court.
    10:47 AM The Court gives statements.
    SENTENCE PRISON
    Based on the defendant's conviction of SEX ABUSECHILD a 2nd Degree Felony, the defendant issentenced to an indeterminate term of not less thanone year nor more than fifteen years in the UtahState Prison.
    Based on the defendant's conviction of SEX ABUSECHILD a 2nd Degree Felony, the defendant issentenced to an indeterminate term of not less thanone year nor more than fifteen years in the UtahState Prison.
    Based on the defendant's conviction of SEX ABUSECHILD a 2nd Degree Felony, the defendant issentenced to an indeterminate term of not less thanone year nor more than fifteen years in the UtahState Prison.
    Based on the defendant's conviction of SEX ABUSECHILD a 2nd Degree Felony, the defendant issentenced to an indeterminate term of not less thanone year nor more than fifteen years in the UtahState Prison.
    Based on the defendant's conviction of SEX ABUSECHILD a 2nd Degree Felony, the defendant issentenced to an indeterminate term of not less thanone year nor more than fifteen years in the UtahState Prison.
    COMMITMENT is to begin immediately. The court willaccept payment tendered on the date of sentencingfor any amount the defendant owes arising from thisorder. The court hereby transfers responsibility forcollection of any remaining balance of the criminalaccounts receivable to the Office of State DebtCollection.
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 18 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    To the DAVIS County Sheriff: The defendant isremanded to your custody for transportation to theUtah State Prison where the defendant will beconfined.
    SENTENCE PRISON CONCURRENT/CONSECUTIVE NOTE
    Charges to run consecutively to each other.
    The Court will enter a continuous protective orderon behalf of the victims. The State will prepare andsubmit the order.
    11-26-2025 105 Filed order: SENTENCE, JUDGMENT, COMMITMENT PRISON
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed November 26, 2025
    11-26-2025 106 Filed: Certificate of Completion of H&H TreatmentProgram
    11-27-2025 107 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    12-05-2025 108 Filed: Appearance of Counsel/Notice of LimitedAppearance
    12-05-2025 109 Filed: Notice of Appeal - Criminal (not Interlocutory)
    12-05-2025 110 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    12-12-2025 Note: Appellate court case number 20251510 has been created on thiscase for the Notice of Appeal filed on 2025-12-05.
    12-12-2025 127 Filed: Appellate Court Document - Notice
    12-12-2025 128 Filed: Appellate Court Document - Notice
    01-03-2026 111 Filed: TRANSADMIN TRANSCRIPT for Hearing 08-28-2025
    01-03-2026 112 Filed: TRANSADMIN TRANSCRIPT for Hearing 11-26-2025
    01-05-2026 113 Filed: Request for Audio Hearing
    01-05-2026 Fee Account created Total Due: 15.00
    01-05-2026 ELEC STORAGE MEDIUM Payment Received: 15.00
    01-06-2026 114 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    01-08-2026 Note: Emailed audio recording from hearing date 11/26/25 todcawley@ksl.com
    01-13-2026 115 Filed: Letter from the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole
    01-14-2026 116 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-25-2026 117 Filed: Motion to Classify
    Filed by: STATE OF UTAH
    03-25-2026 118 Filed: Order (Proposed) Order to classify documents asprivate
    03-25-2026 119 **** PRIVATE **** Filed: Order (Proposed) ContinuousCriminal Protective Order
    03-25-2026 120 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-27-2026 Note: Continuous PO to Judge for signature
    03-31-2026 121 Filed order: Order to classify documents as private
    Judge MICHAEL D DIREDA
    Signed March 31, 2026
    03-31-2026 122 **** PRIVATE **** Filed order: Order Continuous CriminalProtective Order
    03-31-2026 123 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    03-31-2026 124 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    04-01-2026 125 **** PRIVATE **** Filed protective order: ContinuousProtective Order
    04-01-2026 Note: Cont. PO sent for service and certified copy given to DCAO forvictims
    04-01-2026 126 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    04-07-2026 Note: Continuous Protective Order Service Date : 04-07-2026 10:10:00
    05-28-2026 130 Filed: Clerk's Certificate
    05-28-2026 Note: Record sent to COA, via the Google Drive.
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 19 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20
    05-28-2026 131 Filed: Return of Electronic Notification
    10-01-2026 03:17 PM Page 20 of
    CASE NUMBER: 231701597 State Felony20

  • 11. State v. Jackson State v. Jackson Idaho Supreme Court · Decided April 9, 1997 · Silak, Trout, Johnson, Medevitt, Schroeder 939 P.2d 1372; 130 Idaho 293; 1997 Ida. LEXIS 45 (Pacific Reporter, Second Series)

    • 19970409
    • News article
    • Hall Approved

    State v. Jackson
    State v. Jackson
    Idaho Supreme Court · Decided April 9, 1997 · Silak, Trout, Johnson, Medevitt, Schroeder
    939 P.2d 1372; 130 Idaho 293; 1997 Ida. LEXIS 45 (Pacific Reporter, Second Series)
    State v. Jackson
    Opinions

    Opinion of the Court
    Dissenting Opinion

    Opinion of the Court
    SILAK, Justice.

    This is a review of a sentence and an order denying an I.C.R. 35 motion. Thomas Richard Jackson (Jackson) pled guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under sixteen, specifically, his stepdaughters. After hearing evidence, including that Jackson had been convicted in Utah of sexually molesting his biological daughters, the district court sentenced Jackson to a determinate sentence of life in prison, and denied a subsequent Rule 35 motion. Jackson appeals his sentence and the denial of his Rule 35 motion. Jackson argues that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing, and that the prosecution’s alleged failure to follow the plea agreement by not affirmatively recommending retained jurisdiction amounted to fundamental error.

    I.

    FACTS AND PROCEDURE

    Jackson was originally charged with two counts of lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen, Idaho Code § 18-1508. Jackson entered into a plea agreement, under which Jackson plead guilty to one charge of lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen. The State also agreed to make the following sentence recommendation:

    The State recommends the above-named defendant be sentenced to an underlying penitentiary sentence with no agreements as to the recommendation for the underlying sentence; and that the State will recommend that the Court retain jurisdiction; however, the State does not bind itself to follow the recommendations of the 180-day review report.

    The charges against Jackson stemmed from several instances of lewd conduct involving Jackson and two of his stepdaughters, who were seven and nine at the time of the sentencing hearing. The abuse had been occurring for approximately two years. The first instances of abuse involved Jackson having the victims touch his penis, and esealated to the point where Jackson would have the victims sit on his penis and move back and forth. The victims were always dressed, and *294there was a blanket between Jackson and the victims. In addition, there were never any instances of penetration of any type, and Jackson made no threats of violence to his victims. The only threat he made was a comment that if the girls told what he had done, he would have to leave. There is one other related charge in Jackson’s record. In 1986, Jackson was convicted in Utah of sexual abuse of a child, specifically, his biological daughters. He received probation and was required to perform 20 hours of community service and undergo counseling.

    After hearing testimony from Jackson’s biological daughters, his stepdaughters, and his first wife; reviewing the presentence investigation materials; and listening to argument from the attorneys on both sides, the district court sentenced Jackson to a fixed term of life in prison, without a retained jurisdiction period. At the time the judgment of conviction was entered and the sentence imposed, Jackson was 48 years of age.

    II.

    STANDARD OF REVIEW

    Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Our standard of review of a sentence, as well as the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence, are well-established. We have said that “[w]here a sentence is within statutory limits, an appellant has the burden of showing a clear abuse of discretion on the part of the court imposing the sentence.” State v. Cotton, 100 Idaho 573, 577, 602 P.2d 71, 75 (1979). In determining whether the sentencing court abused its discretion, we review all the facts and circumstances of the case. State v. Broadhead, 120 Idaho 141, 143, 814 P.2d 401, 403 (1991). In order to show an abuse of discretion, the defendant must show that in light of the governing criteria, the sentence was excessive, considering any view of the facts. Id. at 145, 814 P.2d at 405. The governing criteria, or objectives of criminal punishment are: “ ‘(1) protection of society; (2) deterrence of the individual and the public generally; (3) the possibility of rehabilitation; and (4) punishment or retribution for wrongdoing.’” Id. (quoting State v. Wolfe, 99 Idaho 382, 384, 582 P.2d 728, 730 (1978)).

    III.

    THE DISTRICT COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN SENTENCING JACKSON TO A FIXED TERM OF LIFE IN PRISON.

    As noted above, this Court reviews a sentence handed down by a district court for abuse of discretion. It is not often that we vacate and modify a sentence, but for the reasons discussed below, we feel compelled to do so in this case.

    A fixed or determinate life sentence is a serious penalty, and should not be imposed lightly. We note with approval the language of our Court of Appeals when it stated that:

    a fixed life sentence may be deemed reasonable if the offense is so egregious that it demands an exceptionally severe measure of retribution and deterrence, or if the offender so utterly lacks rehabilitative potential that imprisonment until death is the only feasible means of protecting society. Unfortunately, in making these determinations, a judge has complete information only in regard to retribution and deterrence, ... The judge must attempt to predict the defendant’s future response to rehabilitative programs and the degree of risk he might pose to society if eventually released....

    State v. Eubank, 114 Idaho 635, 638, 759 P.2d 926, 929 (Ct.App. 1988). Although it recognized the difficulty of predicting future behavior, the Court of Appeals also wisely cautioned that:

    a fixed sentence should not be regarded as a judicial hedge against uncertainty. To the contrary, a fixed life term, with its rigid preclusion of parole or good time, should be regarded as a sentence requiring a high degree of certainty — certainty that the nature of the crime demands incarceration until the perpetrator dies in prison, or certainty that the perpetrator never, at *295any time in his life, could be safely released.

    Id.

    This Court and the Court of Appeals have upheld some fixed life sentences for crimes involving lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen. In State v. Pugsley, 128 Idaho 168, 911 P.2d 761 (Ct.App. 1995), the defendant was sentenced to three concurrent life terms for lewd conduct. The defendant was convicted of three counts of lewd conduct with his minor biological daughter, conduct which at a minimum included genital-to-genital contact. He had been previously convicted of raping his half sister, had allegedly raped another half sister, and had threatened his daughters with death if they ever told what he had done. The defendant had an extensive criminal record, including three felonies as an adult, all of which were violent crimes. Id. at 179-80, 911 P.2d at 762-63.

    In another recent case, the Court of Appeals upheld a fixed life sentence for a man who pled guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen, as Jackson did in this case. State v. Hibbert, 127 Idaho 277, 899 P.2d 987 (Ct.App. 1995). The defendant in Hibbert had repeatedly violently attacked his minor daughter and forced her to have intercourse with him. He also kept her a virtual prisoner in their home, not allowing her to have friends, use the telephone, or go to school. During the course of the proceedings, Hib-bert made death threats to his daughter, a friend and the prosecutor. Therefore, the Court of Appeals upheld the sentence. Id. at 278-79, 899 P.2d at 988-89. See also State v. Lewis, 123 Idaho 336, 352-53, 848 P.2d 394, 410-11 (1993) (upholding a fixed life sentence for a defendant who had previously been convicted for a sexual offense against a minor, attempted penetration, knew at the time of the crime that he was HIV-positive and denied he committed the crime); State v. Martinez, 111 Idaho 281, 723 P.2d 825 (1986) (upholding fixed sentences of thirty years for rape, thirty years for lewd conduct, and fifteen years for aggravated battery, which amounted to a fixed life sentence; the victim suffered extreme physical trauma requiting surgery, and it was doubtful that she would ever make a full recovery).

    Although a fixed life sentence is a serious sentence, lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor under sixteen is a serious crime. The physical injures can be severe, and the mental and emotional trauma can be permanent. However, a fixed life sentence is not appropriate in every lewd and lascivious conduct case, and as illustrated above, is rendered and upheld in cases where the defendant’s conduct was violent, repetitive, very cruel, or life-threatening. Phrased differently, and considering the four goals of sentencing, a fixed life sentence is appropriate if necessary to protect society, to deter the individual and the public, if rehabilitation is unlikely, or if the behavior giving rise to the crime was so egregious that a determinate life sentence is necessary for proper punishment or retribution.

    In this case, Jackson admits that he molested two of his stepdaughters, and he does have a previous conviction for similar behavior with his biological daughters. However, the behavior involved in this particular case did not involve penetration of any type, nor were there any allegations of force. Further, the record indicates that although Jackson was required to participate in some form of counseling under his prior conviction, the counseling was not part of a recognized sex-offender treatment program. This becomes important because Jackson has indicated that he wishes to undergo treatment and will cooperate in every way necessary. In addition, an evaluator indicated that the proper treatment could help prevent Jackson from re-offending. It is also significant that the appellant took full responsibility for his actions, and did not blame the victims in any way. Finally, Jackson had abstained from drugs and alcohol and had worked fairly steadily throughout his adult life.

    With any crime, there is a chance that the defendant will re-offend. Indeed, the evaluator in this case offered no guarantees that Jackson would not re-offend, even if he undergoes sexual offender treatment. However, as our Court of Appeals noted, a fixed life sentence should not be imposed as a hedge against uncertainty. The behavior exhibited *296in this case, while reprehensible, is not so egregious that Jackson should die in prison.

    For the reasons discussed above, and after conducting our own careful review of the record in this ease, we hold that a fixed term of life in prison is excessive in this case. Considering the four goals of sentencing, we note that although society does need to be protected from sex offenders, and Jackson and the public must be deterred from such behavior, a fixed term of life in prison is not necessary to accomplish those goals. Further, Jackson has indicated that he wants to undergo treatment, has shown a desire to change his behavior and exhibits a possibility for rehabilitation. Finally, while Jackson deserves to be punished for his behavior, a fixed life term in prison is not necessary or justified in this case.

    Therefore, Jackson’s sentence is hereby modified to an indeterminate life sentence with a fixed term of fifteen years in prison. When fifteen years have passed, the earliest time that Jackson would be eligible for parole, the youngest victim in this case will be over 21 years of age. Thus, the victims in this case will both be adults.

    As to the issue of the breach of the plea agreement, although it was raised as an issue in his opening brief, Jackson subsequently withdrew this issue in his brief on his Motion to Reconsider Denial of Appellant’s Motion to Augment the Issues on Appeal. Accordingly, we do not reach this issue.

    IY.

    CONCLUSION

    In light of all the facts in this case, and considering the four goals of sentencing, we hold that Jackson has met his burden of showing that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to a fixed life sentence. We therefore modify the sentence to an indeterminate life sentence with a fifteen year fixed period of incarceration.
    JOHNSON, MeDEVITT and SCHROEDER, JJ., concur.
    Dissenting Opinion
    Chief Justice TROUT,

    dissenting from the Court’s opinion.

    I write only to indicate that I believe that the trial court is in the best position to make the determination of the appropriate sentence. Where the record reflects that the sentencing judge carefully considered the evidence and statements presented to him and the four goals of sentencing, this Court should set aside the sentence only where reasonable minds could not differ as to the excessiveness of the sentence. State v. Broadhead, 120 Idaho 141, 145, 814 P.2d 401, 405 (1991) (quoting State v. Small, 107 Idaho 504, 505, 690 P.2d 1336, 1337 (1984), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Brown, 121 Idaho 385, 393, 825 P.2d 482, 490 (1992)). This Court should not substitute its judgment for that of the sentencing judge where reasonable minds could differ as to whether the sentence is necessary to achieve the four goals of sentencing. Id., 120 Idaho at 145, 814 P.2d at 405 (quoting State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct.App. 1982)). The record here reflects that the trial judge carefully considered the heinous nature of the offense, the devastating impact on the victims, and the fact that Jackson had previously been convicted of this offense, as well as society’s need to be protected from this type of predator. I find no abuse of discretion and, thus, must respectfully dissent.

Documents

Have docs or info? Add information

Criminal case documents

Floodlit does not have a copy of a related probable cause affidavit. Please check back soon or contact us to request that we look for one.

Civil case documents

Floodlit does not have a copy of a related civil complaint. Please check back soon or contact us to request that we look for one.

Other documents

Floodlit does not have a copy of any other related documents. Please check back soon or contact us to request that we look for some.

Timeline

  • 1947
    Born

Add information

If someone you know was harmed by the person listed on this page, or if you would like us to add or correct any information, please fill out the form below. We will keep you anonymous. You can also contact us directly.

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
The abuser/defendant/accused's name. You can put a partial name (e.g. John) or a full name (e.g. John Allen Smith)
Tell us what you think the date(s) should be.
Share links, comments, updates or any other information you like.
Let us know any other thoughts you have about this case listing.
Upload images or documents.
Drop files here or
Accepted file types: jpeg, jpg, gif, png, pdf, docx, webp, jpe, Max. file size: 32 MB, Max. files: 5.
    You can use a pseudonym or leave this empty if you prefer.
    We will only use this to contact you, and will not share it with anyone without your consent.

    Other Mormon sex abuse cases

      • John Fanning (1932 – 2012) was a Mormon branch president in Texas, bishop in Oklahoma and Boy Scout executive in several US states, including Utah; accused in 1986 in Utah of sexually abusing at least three boys, including during LDS-sponsored scouting activities; admitted guilt; convicted via plea agreement in 1986 or 1987; sentenced to 30 days in jail and spent approximately 18 months on probation; died in 2012
      • View report »
        • "I told [John Fanning] we had two options. Immediate termination or he could resign and I would pay him through the end of next month but he had to leave as of now. He elected to resign."
        — K. Hart Bullock, LDS church member and Scout Executive, BSA Great Salt Lake Council, Oct. 23, 1986
      • Allen Brinkerhoff (1929 – 2019) was a Mormon bishop and stake president and manager of an LDS stake welfare farm in Nevada; arrested in Nevada in 2007 and admitted to sexually abusing two children; was convicted and sentenced to 5 to 15 years in prison for battery with intent to commit sexual assault, and 12 to 32 months in prison for sexual abuse of a child; died in 2019
      • View report »