NewsPolitics

Actions

Utah Supreme Court overturns Doug Lovell's death sentence over religious talk at trial

Posted
and last updated

SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court has overturned the death sentence of Doug Lovell over discussion of religion and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in a courtroom.

In a unanimous ruling issued Thursday, the state's top court declined to overturn Lovell's murder conviction. But the justices ordered a new sentencing, declaring his previous attorneys failed to adequately object when prosecutors brought up Latter-day Saint church doctrine in court.

"We agree that Lovell did not receive the representation the United States Constitution guarantees him. Lovell’s two attorneys provided ineffective assistance when they failed to object to, among other things, testimony regarding Lovell’s excommunication from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," Associate Chief Justice John Pearce wrote. "This prejudiced Lovell’s ability to have a fair sentencing hearing."

Lovell was convicted of the 1985 murder of Joyce Yost. He was accused of killing her to prevent her from testifying against him for kidnapping and raping her. Yost's body has never been found.

Lovell originally pleaded guilty the day his original trial was to begin. He promised to lead police to her body, which he claimed was in Ogden Canyon. He was then sentenced to die and appealed. In 2011, the Utah Supreme Court ruled he had not been properly advised of his trial rights and overturned his conviction. He went on trial all over again in 2015 and was convicted and sentenced to execution.

It was during those court hearings that religion came up. Specifically, Lovell's involvement in prison with bishops for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who volunteered at the prison. They testified about Lovell's attempts to reform himself and how he was a model prisoner. But it was prosecutors who asked witnesses Mormon doctrinal questions, like if Lovell had been excommunicated from the faith.

"We agree that reasonable counsel would have recognized both the problems with this testimony and its potential to invite the jury to base its decision on something other than its own assessment of Lovell. And we agree that reasonable counsel would have done something—either object to the entire line of questioning, seek curative instructions, or move for a mistrial—to protect their client," Justice Pearce wrote.

The Court declared that "by inserting a religious test for remorse into the proceedings, the State gave the jury a way out of making a decision that is difficult for any person to make about another: whether a defendant has truly changed. The State offered jurors an off-ramp by intimating that it could use readmission to Church membership as a gauge for whether Lovell was actually remorseful and had changed his ways."

Justice Pearce added later in the ruling: "The prejudicial nature of [witness] testimony is even more acute considering our State’s religious demographics," referencing that at the time of his sentencing, a majority of Utahns identified as members of the LDS Church.

The Utah Attorney General's Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment, saying it was reviewing the ruling. Lovell's attorney, Colleen Coebergh told FOX 13 News she had not yet spoken with her client and so she had no comment. Yost's children, who have attended hearings in the past, did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment on the Utah Supreme Court's decision.

The Utah Supreme Court sent the case back to a lower-court for a new sentencing. It is unclear if Lovell could be re-sentenced to death or if a judge will instead impose a life sentence.

It's not the first time the LDS Church has been a focus of the death penalty case. In 2019, FOX 13 News reported Lovell sought another trial accusing the faith of interfering in his case by refusing to allow the group of bishops who ministered at the prison to testify on his behalf. One suggested he broke ranks to testify anyway and ajudge ruled the Church didn't interfere in the case.

Read the Utah Supreme Court ruling here: