## Facts

- A hiker reported people digging at a San Juan County area known for Ancestral Puebloan ruins.
- A county officer went to the site, encountered the Redds, and heard competing claims about permission to be on and dig on the land.
- Investigators returned and documented the excavation area; later review showed the site was on state-owned land.
- Investigators found scattered, fragmentary human bones at and around the excavation.
- The remains were assessed as approximately 1,000 years old and associated with an archaeological site rather than a recognizable modern burial.
- The State charged James and Jeanne Redd in separate informations with third-degree felony abuse or desecration of a dead human body, alleging they intentionally and unlawfully “disinterred” human remains under Utah Code § 76-9-704(1)(b) (1995).
- After a preliminary hearing, the magistrate dismissed the charges for lack of probable cause, reasoning the statute did not reach the conduct shown; the State appealed and the cases were consolidated.

## Issues

1. Whether ancient, fragmentary human remains at an archaeological site qualify as a “dead human body” that has been “buried or interred” under Utah Code § 76-9-704(1)(b) (1995).
2. Whether the preliminary-hearing evidence established probable cause that defendants intentionally and unlawfully “disinterred” such a body within the statute.

## Decision

- The court affirmed dismissal of both informations.
- It held § 76-9-704(1)(b) did not clearly extend to disturbance of ancient archaeological human remains of the type found here.
- Because the statute, properly construed, did not cover the alleged conduct, the State failed to show probable cause on the charged offense.

## Legal Principles

- Criminal statutes are construed according to ordinary meaning, including the common understanding of terms such as “dead human body,” “buried,” and “interred.”
- Statutory context and apparent legislative purpose inform interpretation; a provision addressing abuse of a corpse is primarily directed at contemporary wrongs involving identifiable burials and exhumations.
- When a criminal statute is ambiguous as applied, courts construe it narrowly in favor of the accused (rule of lenity-type approach) and will not expand criminal liability absent clear legislative direction.
- At a preliminary hearing, the State must present evidence supporting probable cause that the charged conduct satisfies each statutory element as construed.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that Utah’s abuse-of-corpse statute, as written, did not clearly criminalize disturbance of millennium-old archaeological human remains and that the State’s preliminary-hearing evidence therefore did not establish probable cause; dismissal of the felony charges was affirmed.


State v. Redd, 954 P.2d 230 (Utah Ct. App. 1998)