Kouri Richins, the Kamas mother of three who was found guilty of killing her husband, Eric Richins, will be sentenced to 25 years to life in prison without the possibility of parole on what would have been his 44th birthday.

Defense attorneys earlier this month asked Third District Court Judge Richard Mrazik to move the court date from May 13 to the week of June 15, citing the need for additional time. The Summit County Attorney’s Office opposed changing the date, and Mrazik agreed in his Monday ruling. 

The judge cited an unredacted version of the prosecutor’s court filing opposing a continuance, which described in “compelling detail the effect that a delay of sentencing would have” on the couple’s sons. Mrazik said the children “would endure significant prejudice if the sentencing hearing is continued beyond its current setting.”

In a public version of the prosecutors’ reply, they said there is “no good reason” for the Richins family to suffer further delays. 

“For three years, Eric Richins’ family has painfully and patiently stood by as the defendant has manufactured one reason after another to delay this proceeding,” court documents stated.

Defense attorneys Wendy Lewis, Kathy Nester and Alexander Ramos said they wanted to “properly research and prepare mitigation evidence and witnesses” for Kouri and cited additional scheduling conflicts due to a death in one of the lawyers’ families and a separate trial.

Mrazik said the defense failed to explain why it needed more time to prepare, as Kouri previously waived her right to be sentenced within five days and was given almost two months after being found guilty of five felonies on March 16. The judge also said she has two other attorneys who can represent her at the sentencing hearing if one is unavailable. 

Utah law permits the defendant the opportunity to “make a statement and to present any information in mitigation of punishment,” while also affording victims the right to “speedy disposition of the charges free from unwarranted delay” caused by the defendant. 

“Accordingly, because Defendant has not provided reasons sufficient to justify continuing the sentencing hearing, and because the victims have an interest in a speedy disposition of this case, Defendant’s motion is respectfully denied,” the ruling stated. 

Mrazik also confirmed he has open availability on May 13 to ensure “all interested parties have ample opportunity to be heard.” 

A Summit County jury after a two-week trial found Kouri guilty of fatally poisoning Eric with a lethal dose of fentanyl in March 2022. She was convicted of five felony charges: aggravated murder, attempted homicide, two counts of insurance fraud, and forgery.

Prosecutors did not seek the death penalty in the case. She faces a prison sentence of 25 years to life, with or without the possibility of parole.

The post Judge rules against moving Kouri Richins’ sentencing date appeared first on Park Record.

About 250 Summit County residents will soon learn whether they’ve been summoned for jury selection in the murder trial of Kouri Richins, where just 12 will be seated for almost five weeks of proceedings.

Third District Court Judge Richard Mrazik met with the prosecutors and defense attorneys on Monday morning to determine which potential jurors would not be summoned. The court’s jury team plans to notify residents this week if they need to appear. Jury selection is set to begin on Tuesday, Feb. 10, and could last six days. Witness testimony and evidence will be presented starting on Feb. 23.

Kouri is charged with aggravated murder and attempted homicide, first-degree felonies, stemming from the March 2022 death of her husband, Eric Richins, as well as two counts of second-degree felony insurance fraud and forgery, a third-degree felony. She has pleaded not guilty.

Her attorneys — Wendy Lewis, Kathy Nester and Alexander Ramos — also asked Mrazik to reconsider moving the trial to Salt Lake County in a motion filed on Friday. They argued there’s a “reasonable likelihood that a fair trial cannot take place in Summit County” based on questionnaire responses from prospective jurors.

The Summit County Attorney’s Office opposed changing venues in a filing on Sunday, citing the court’s previous ruling. The judge denied the defense’s request on Monday.

Mrazik did not appear to have any doubts about whether it was possible to seat a fair and impartial jury in Summit County.

Monday’s hearing focused on striking potential jurors “for cause,” such as bias or a close familiarity with a key person connected to the case. From the original pool of 449, about 250 people will be summoned. 

Around 40 people will be called each day for voir dire in the morning and afternoon. They’ll be asked questions from a court-approved list. Ultimately, eight jurors and four alternates will be chosen.

Nester expressed serious concerns about the trial’s timeline, for which Mrazik has set a firm deadline, and said there could be a mistrial if the trial extends too long and jurors drop out or if Kouri’s rights would be compromised if it’s forced to end on schedule.

“I don’t see a scenario in the world … where this case will end on March 27,” Nester told the judge on Monday.

She pointed to at least 1,000 exhibits that could be presented and witness testimony that could take days. For example, one of the state’s experts reviewed the Richins bank accounts, tax information and business documents, culminating in 70 exhibits to go through at trial. Nester worried the case could morph from a murder trial into one of complex, white-collar crime.

She said that one expert could take three days, and prosecutors have identified more than 10 experts and 100 other witnesses who could be called at trial. The defense has 35 witnesses of its own, and would likely cross-examine anyone called to testify. Nester anticipated attorneys would need two full weeks to lay their defense, and questioned if they would run out of time before then.

Mrazik was not convinced. 

He said the trial must end on March 27, with the jury receiving the case. The judge recognized the Kouri Richins case as very important and a long time coming, but he said it is one of 1,000 on his docket. If needed, Mrazik was amenable to giving the jury more time to reach a verdict.

Kouri has been held in the Summit County Jail since her arrest in May 2023. Her trial was originally set for May 2025 but was postponed until an appellant court could determine whether a fair and impartial jury could be seated in Summit County. The Utah Supreme Court in June declined to hear the defense’s appeal, and the trial was rescheduled for 2026.

Summit County spent about $540,000 on the public defender contract for the case in 2025, with another $500,000 earmarked for 2026.

The County Attorney’s Office filed a separate felony case against Kouri in June 2025 for financial crimes dating back to June 2021. In that case, she’s charged with five counts of mortgage fraud, five counts of forgery, seven counts of issuing a bad check, seven counts of money laundering, one count of communications fraud and one count of a pattern of unlawful activity. Those charges will be tried separately. 

The post Summit County prepares for jury selection in Kouri Richins trial appeared first on Park Record.

Kouri Richins will likely remain in the Summit County Jail until the outcome of her February jury trial.

On Monday, Third District Judge Richard Mrazik denied the defense’s motion to reconsider bail and release for the third time since the Kamas mother’s arrest in 2023. The Summit County Attorney’s Office charged Kouri Richins with five felonies stemming from the death of her husband, Eric Richins, in March 2022.

While defense attorneys Wendy Lewis and Kathy Nester argued that new evidence “negates” her guilt, Mrazik ruled that there is other evidence prosecutors could use to persuade a jury that Kouri Richins is guilty.

“While Defendant may be able to use Mr. Crozier’s recent recantation to poke holes in the State’s case, the holes are not substantial enough to undermine the court’s prior determination regarding substantial evidence,” the court ruling states.

The defense filed the motion to reconsider bail in October after a key witness recanted his statement, claiming he never sold fentanyl to a woman employed by Kouri Richins. Prosecutors allege Kouri Richins purchased fentanyl from the woman and accused her of administering a fatal dose to her husband.

However, Mrazik determined the information was not substantial enough considering the other evidence in the case.

The judge referenced findings from his previous decision to deny bail in June 2023. The court document cited evidence showing Eric Richins died from ingesting fentanyl; evidence alleging Kouri Richins purchased dozens of pills from the woman one month before her husband’s death; evidence indicating Kouri Richins believed she would benefit financially from her husband’s death; and evidence showing consciousness of guilt, including internet search histories and inconsistent statements to first responders regarding “what she did between discovering Eric dead and calling 911.”

Mrazik also said a jury could believe the key witness’s statements to detectives in May 2023 rather than what he said in September 2025, “given that they were made two years closer in time to the events in question.” He added that the retraction of the former statement does not make it unusable in court.

The judge ruled that the body of evidence “showing motive and consciousness of guilt … is sufficient to permit a reasonable jury to conclude that Defendant committed the charged offense of Aggravated Murder.”

Kouri Richins is charged with aggravated murder and attempted homicide, first-degree felonies, as well as two counts of second-degree felony insurance fraud and forgery, a third-degree felony. She has entered not guilty pleas for each count.

Kouri Richins has been held in the Summit County Jail since her arrest in May 2023. Her criminal trial is scheduled to begin on February 23, 2026, and is expected to last five weeks.

The Summit County Attorney’s Office filed a separate felony case against Kouri Richins in June for financial crimes dating back to June 2021. In that case, she’s charged with five counts of mortgage fraud, five counts of forgery, seven counts of issuing a bad check, seven counts of money laundering, one count of communications fraud and one count of a pattern of unlawful activity. 

Kouri Richins is scheduled to have her initial appearance in that case on Friday, Dec. 5.

The post Third District judge denies bail for Kouri Richins, again appeared first on Park Record.

Kouri Richins and her defense team have asked Third District Judge Richard Mrazik to reconsider granting her bail for the third time since her May 2023 arrest, citing newly obtained evidence.

In a motion filed Thursday afternoon, the attorneys noted that a key witness now claims he never sold fentanyl to a woman employed by Kouri. Prosecutors allege Kouri purchased the drug through that employee and used it to poison her husband, Eric Richins, in 2022.

Defense attorneys said the evidence “not only negates Ms. Richins’ guilt but completely eviscerates the prosecution’s own theory that Ms. Richins procured the fentanyl that ultimately killed her husband.”

Court documents state Eric died in the early hours of March 4, 2022, after ingesting five times the lethal dose of illicit fentanyl. He was 39.

The Summit County Attorney’s Office has alleged throughout the case that Kouri acquired fentanyl from a woman who worked for her as a house cleaner. She was accused of contacting the woman between December 2021 and February 2022, requesting prescription pain medication, and ultimately asked for something stronger — fentanyl — a few weeks later.

Prosecutors said Kouri served Eric a sandwich on Valentine’s Day that made him ill to the point where he believed he had been poisoned. About a week later, Kouri allegedly contacted the woman to purchase more drugs. 

Six days after the pills were delivered, Eric died of an overdose.

Investigators spoke to the woman, who said in an interview days before Kouri was arrested in May 2023 that she purchased fentanyl from a man. The Sheriff’s Office also interviewed the man, who admitted selling the woman fentanyl.

However, the defense said prosecutors interviewed the man again in April. When asked again if he had sold fentanyl to the woman, the man said he “had not sold fentanyl.” He specified he sold OxyContin to the woman on two occasions in early 2022, according to court documents.

Prosecutors reportedly asked the man why he previously said he had sold fentanyl to the woman if he did not, and he said he did not remember saying that. The man added that he had been detoxing from drugs during the original interview and was “out of it.” He is now sober, the filing stated.

Defense attorneys said they learned of the information during a recent interview with the man rather than through disclosure from the prosecution. 

They also filed a motion asking the judge to compel the County Attorney’s Office to reveal evidence they have a duty to under state law. That includes “all evidence favorable to the defendant that is material to guilt or punishment.” The defense argued it was a matter of law and ethics under Utah’s Rules of Criminal Procedure. 

“The prosecution’s failure to disclose — and continued concealment of — exculpatory evidence that Ms. Richins did not procure fentanyl inflicts ongoing harm on Ms. Richins, the public, and the integrity of our legal system,” the court filing states. “This is precisely the type of misconduct Rule 3.8 was designed to prevent. By withholding this evidence, the prosecution abandons its duty to seek justice and undermines the assurance of a fair trial.”

Defense attorneys asked Mrazik to impose a three-day deadline for the prosecution to disclose all evidence, including emails, text massages, phone messages, recordings, video footage and any other form of correspondence between its staff and the man; all notes, correspondences and reports prepared by law enforcement or the prosecution related to his April interview; and any statements, recordings, reports or notes in whatever medium that negate guilt. They also want the court to require prosecutors to disclose on the record any oral statements that would contradict prior statements made by witnesses when conducting interviews.

The defense hopes the new evidence will be enough to successfully argue that there has been a change in circumstances in the case.

Mrazik first considered bail during a detention hearing in June 2023, when Kouri was not entitled to it because she was facing the death penalty. Another motion was filed in October 2024 after the death penalty was dropped. Mrazik did not grant bail in either case. Kouri has been held in the Summit County Jail for 28 months.

“In order to continue to hold Ms. Richins without bail, the court must first find that there is substantial evidence to support the charge and that simply no longer exists,” the motion states.

The defense argued none of the pills were ever found or tested and the woman only believes she sold Kouri fentanyl because she thinks that is what she purchased. They said there is no physical evidence.

In other words, “if the state cannot place fentanyl in the hands of the defendant, there is no case.” 

The Summit County Attorney’s Office declined to comment. Prosecutors have 14 days to respond to the filing.

The post Defense attorneys for Kouri Richins say new evidence ‘negates’ her guilt appeared first on Park Record.

Summit County Clerk Eve Furse doubled down on her decision to reject 30 signature packets supporting the referendum petition to stop Dakota Pacific Real Estate’s mixed-use development in Kimball Junction.

Attorneys representing Furse responded to the citizen-filed lawsuit against her in Third District Court on Monday, defending her choice to invalidate dozens of packets and opposing the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment. The hearing could allow the judge to make a ruling without a full trial if certain facts of the case aren’t disputed; Furse’s court filing says they are.

Before Third District Court Judge Richard Mrazik rules on whether the disassembled signature packets satisfy the binding requirements under state law, Furse asked the court to “answer whether the superseding state legislation renders the current county referendum moot.”

The clerk was referencing the Utah Legislature-backed Senate Bill 26, which allows for the same zoning change and use as Ordinance No. 987 — the Summit County Council’s December approval of the amended development agreement. The filing argues the state law supersedes the county’s legislative authority and that a successful referendum in November would not halt the project. Summit County Manager Shayne Scott approved the Dakota Pacific project for the second time late last month.

Likely, a determination about whether the referendum complied with state law would only be made if the court determines the will of the voters has more authority than S.B. 26. The issue then becomes whether the separation of the initial packet pages before they were submitted to the Clerk’s Office is enough to invalidate them.

Furse argues it is. She referenced the Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office vote.Utah.gov website, which includes information for local referenda and references sections of state code (Utah Code 20A-7-601, 603, 604, and 605), providing instructions for signature gathering. 

Packets “cannot be taken apart or rearranged once they are bound. The packets will be rejected if this is done,” according to the Lieutenant Governor’s Office. Furse rejected packets one through 29 and packet 39 for improper circulation. 

Furse’s court filing says there was evidence indicating the signature packets were removed or added after the packets were prepared. Several had page numbers crossed out and renumbered. The initial packets didn’t appear to be uniformly prepared or correctly preserved, in contrast with the packets the Clerk’s Office did accept. 

There were additional discrepancies in the petition declaration filled out by the circulators, such as the number of signatures reported versus what was actually inside the packet. The packets had other issues, such as unreadable, duplicative, undated and unmatching signatures, along with signers who were not registered to vote or lived outside of Summit County. Those signatures were not counted.

The complaint — filed by Summit County residents Angela Moschetta, Reed Galen, Dana Williams, Ruby Diaz and Brendan Weinstein — said only a few packets were separated after preparation and alleged the Clerk’s Office universally rejected packets with three-hole punches without verifying if the pages had been removed. The group argues Furse erred in her judgment and that the referendum sponsors followed state law.

The clerk disagrees. Court documents say Furse has been the subject of the ire of frustrated citizens. 

“It is easy, and perhaps natural, to shoot the messenger. But doing so will not produce the lasting change, or local control, these advocates desire,” the filing states.

Furse asserts she reached out to the referendum sponsors when the initial packets were rejected and offered ways for the group to overcome or resolve the issue. The court filing states that the sponsors did not reply. Moschetta emailed the clerk, saying all the packets were compliant. However, Moschetta is not a sponsor.

The court filing was critical of Moschetta’s involvement because it is unclear what role she had in the referendum effort, based on the court filings, other than being a concerned citizen volunteer. Furse also noted Utah Code declares “sponsors or an agent of the sponsors shall create referendum packets,” yet the petitioners do not identify who, what, when, where or how the initial packets were created.

The Clerk’s Office agreed to provisionally post the signatures, which total 2,454 and would be enough to put the referendum on the November ballot if the rejected packets are deemed valid. Furse questioned the integrity of the signatures in those packets, but she said she’ll follow whatever determination the Third District Court makes.

The summary judgment hearing is scheduled for 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 19.

The post Summit County clerk cites concerns in Dakota Pacific referendum dispute appeared first on Park Record.

The highest court in the state has set a date for when it will review the jury selection process in the Kouri Richins case.

Next month, the Utah Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments from appellant lawyers representing the Summit County Attorney’s Office and Kouri’s legal defense asking justices to reverse a ruling made by Third District Court Presiding Judge Laura Scott. 

Prosecutors and defense attorneys want to pull prospective jurors from two counties, Summit and Salt Lake, and also hold the voir dire in person instead of online. They filed a joint petition asking the Utah Supreme Court to hear their case last month, and the court agreed on Jan. 6. Now, oral arguments have been set for 10 a.m. on Feb. 11 at the Matheson Courthouse in Salt Lake City.

Assistant Solicitor General for the Utah Attorney General’s Office Marian Decker will represent the state, while appellate attorneys Freyja Johnson and Emily Adams will argue on behalf of Kouri’s defense team.

“Because of the challenging [sic] of clearing a court calendar for four weeks, and because Kouri has been incarcerated for 18 months, the parties do not want to move the trial,” a 198-page joint motion stated. “However, the parties are concerned about their ability to empanel an impartial jury in a timely manner now that they are now allowed to hold in-person voir dire or to expand the venire to Salt Lake County.”

As the state’s “court of last resort,” those involved with the case said it’s remarkable for the Utah Supreme Court to even consider the appeal. Summit County Attorney Margaret Olson and Chief Prosecutor Brad Bloodworth plan to attend the oral arguments in person.

After the presentation, the justices will hold a conference and vote to either grant or deny the motions. One justice is assigned to write an opinion, though others may also write a separate concurring or dissenting opinion, according to the Utah Supreme Court website. The justices’ ruling will ultimately determine how jury selection will be conducted in the case.

Justices are assisted by law clerks, staff attorneys, a Clerk of the Court and a staff of legal secretaries and front office clerks. Staff attorneys screen the cases to be heard, and the Clerk of Court is responsible for processing the legal matters filed.

Once the Utah Supreme Court hears the case, it could take several months, or even years, before a decision is reached. However, the joint petition requested an expedited review process given the timeline of the case and the upcoming four-week murder trial set to start in April.

Third District Court Judge Richard Mrazik originally approved the request to expand the jury pool, but Scott overruled him. She said the two sides failed to show there are “extraordinary circumstances” in the case that would allow for special rules despite national and international media attention.

Defense lawyers Wendy Lewis and Kathy Nester said they want the jury pool to be expanded to Salt Lake County in hopes of diversifying the pool. The County Attorney’s Office agreed. Mrazik said he was unfamiliar with any other cases in Utah that have pulled jurors from two counties, but he was supportive of the effort.

The lawyers appeared in court on Thursday for a hearing to argue what evidence should be allowed during the trial. Another court date was set for Feb. 3 for the two sides to review a draft questionnaire that will be sent to potential jurors. 

Prosecutors and defense attorneys briefly considered asking Mrazik to move the hearing until after the oral arguments. However, the judge indicated the lawyers’ questions for the prospective pool are unlikely to change regardless of the Utah Supreme Court decision.

Kouri faces nine felony charges stemming from the death of her husband, Eric Richins, including aggravated murder and attempted criminal homicide. 

Eric died of a fentanyl overdose in March 2022. Prosecutors allege Kouri poisoned him with a Moscow Mule cocktail laced with fentanyl, and that she attempted to do it a month earlier with a drug-laced sandwich on Valentine’s Day. The County Attorney’s Office said Kouri felt trapped in her marriage and had a financial motive to kill her husband.

Kouri Richins and her family have maintained her innocence. She has been held in the Summit County Jail without bail since her arrest in May 2023.

The post Utah Supreme Court sets oral arguments for jury selection, process in Kouri Richins case appeared first on Park Record.

Did the Summit County Sheriff’s Office illegally obtain evidence while investigating Kouri Richins in connection to the death of her husband, Eric Richins?

Defense attorneys Kathy Nester and Wendy Lewis laid the foundation for several claims during a Third District Court hearing on Thursday alleging detectives violated the Kamas mother of three’s constitutional rights granted to a defendant. The lawyers then argued for specific material, such as electronic data and the notorious “Walk the Dog” letter, to be inadmissible during the murder trial against the Kamas mother of three because of how it was obtained.

Third District Court Judge Richard Mrazik considered three motions to suppress statements Kouri made before her arrest, data from her phone and Apple accounts, and the controversial letter recovered from her Summit County Jail cell. Mrazik didn’t rule after the seven-hour-long hearing, but he’s expected to do so once each side files its memo.

Detailed testimony from sheriff’s detectives, corrections officers and Eric Richins’ brother-in-law about the investigation, such as how searches unfolded and who had access to the Richins’ home following Kouri’s arrest, will be cited in the arguments made by Summit County prosecutors and the defense.

Detective Eric Maynard and Deputy Jayme Woody were questioned about their experiences during the initial investigation, describing how they detained Kouri before executing search warrants for her home and person. Her defense attorneys argued investigators took Kouri’s phone without a proper warrant and accused them of not informing her of her rights: her right to remain silent, her right to ask for a lawyer and her right to refuse questioning.

Maynard and Woody affirmed that Kouri was not under arrest at that point and that she voluntarily gave investigators her phone, granting them access to it. However, both stated they never explicitly informed Kouri of her rights or asked if she wanted her attorney present. 

Nester also questioned Detective Jeff O’Driscoll about whether he interviewed Kouri without a lawyer, a violation of her Sixth Amendment right. O’Driscoll took over as lead investigator on the case around April 2023, and said he met with Kouri at her home to introduce himself rather than conduct an interview.

The detective described Kouri as “cheery” and open to speaking with law enforcement, noting that after the three-hour meeting, Kouri sent a follow-up email with additional information related to the investigation. 

Nester questioned whether the detective had identified Kouri as a primary suspect in her husband’s death at that point. O’Driscoll said he did not have definitive information that she was a suspect, and was investigating the case as an accident, suicide or homicide.

“If she had said, ‘Hey, I killed my husband,’ would you have used that against her?” Nester asked. 

“Likely,” O’Driscoll replied. 

“OK, so you didn’t Mirandize her at that point. You knew she had a lawyer. You knew you were looking for information about her involvement in her husband’s death and you did not Mirandize her, correct?” Nester argued.

Prosecutors did concede that an orange notebook was illegally obtained during a search of the Richins home a few weeks later, on May 8, 2023, the same day Kouri was arrested outside of a Salt Lake City business and charged with aggravated murder. The County Attorney’s Office alleges she poisoned Eric with a fentanyl-laced Moscow Mule on March 4, 2022.

Chief Prosecutor Brad Bloodworth said law enforcement did not have a warrant to seize the notebook at the time but that it would have inevitably been discovered. Its contents remains unknown, but the defense said it was intended for Kouri’s therapist and is “privileged.”

Nester said deputies opened the notebook and sought a new warrant with the authority to take it after reading the contents. She pointed to the “fruit of the poisonous tree,” a legal argument based on the idea that evidence illegally obtained is tainted and therefore inadmissible.

Lewis made similar arguments in support of the defense’s motion to suppress the six-page “Walk the Dog” letter, which may have been obtained through a potentially illegal search.

Prosecutors alleged the letter was written by Kouri to her mother, Lisa Darden, requesting that Darden ask Kouri’s brother, Ronald Darden, to provide false testimony. However, the defense has maintained its part of a manuscript from a fictional mystery book she’s writing about drugs and a Mexican prison.

Sheriff’s Sgt. Braxton Barrett, a corrections officer at the Summit County Jail, and Sgt. Jeremy Thomas, a jail administrator, provided testimony about searches of Kouri’s cell on Sept. 13 and 14. The defense played video footage from the jail showing the search when the letter was found. 

Lewis asserted the pages were inside a manila envelope addressed to Skye Lazaro, Kouri’s former lawyer, and labeled as attorney-client privilege. However, jail staff said the letter was found in an LSAT prep book.

Barrett and Thomas described looking at hundreds of pages in Kouri’s cell to confirm there wasn’t contraband. They affirmed they did not read privileged documents.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys will submit written arguments citing the evidence and testimony. They’ll have about two weeks to do so. Then, Mrazik will make a ruling on what evidence will be suppressed during the upcoming four-week trial set to start in late April.

The next hearing date was set for Feb. 3 to go over the draft jury questionnaire.

The post Kouri Richins’ defense argues for suppressing evidence ahead of murder trial appeared first on Park Record.