Haslam v. Salt Lake City ( 2015 )

2015 UT App 228THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
ADAM SCOTT HASLAM,
Appellant,
v.
SALT LAKE CITY,
Appellee.
Per Curiam Decision
No. 20130837-CA
Filed September 11, 2015
Third District Court, Salt Lake Department
The Honorable L.A. Dever
No. 130900826
Michael P. Studebaker, Attorney for Appellant
Padma Veeru-Collings and Steven L. Newton,
Attorneys for Appellee
Before JUDGES J. FREDERIC VOROS JR., STEPHEN L. ROTH, and
JOHN A. PEARCE.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Adam Scott Haslam appeals the trial court’s denial of his
petition for post-conviction relief. He argues that he is entitled to
relief because Salt Lake City failed to disclose exculpatory
evidence regarding arresting officer Trooper Lisa Steed’s
performance and disciplinary records. However, this court has
recently decided issues identical to the one Haslam raises. See
Monson v. Salt Lake City, 2015 UT App 136, 351 P.3d 851;
Magallanes v. South Salt Lake City, 2015 UT App 154.
¶2 This court concluded that evidence of Trooper Steed’s
professional misconduct was merely impeachment evidence
rather than exculpatory evidence. Accordingly, the City had no
obligation to disclose the evidence prior to the entry of a guilty
Haslam v. Salt Lake City
plea. Monson, 2015 UT App 136, ¶¶ 10–11; see also Magallanes,
2015 UT App 154, ¶ 7. Additionally, the Post-Conviction
Remedies Act provides no relief for newly discovered
impeachment evidence. See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-104(1)(e)(iii)
(LexisNexis 2012). Haslam’s claims are the same as those raised
in Monson and Magallanes are resolved by those decisions.
¶3 Affirmed.
20130837-CA 2 2015 UT App 228