Utah court schedules June 22 hearing after defense says it will seek dismissal in State v. Mark Allen

A Utah court set a June 22 hearing and ordered briefing deadlines after defense counsel told the court he would file a motion to dismiss in State of Utah v. Mark Allen, Case No. 211401656.

The defense announced on the record, "I intend to be filing a motion to dismiss this case," and the court granted the defense 14 days to file its motion, directing that the filing be submitted no later than May 13. Prosecutor Greg Peterson identified himself "for the state of Utah" on the record; Laurie Hobbs also stated she was appearing on behalf of the victim.

The court and parties discussed whether an evidentiary hearing would be required; defense counsel said he did not think one would be necessary, and Peterson agreed the issues were based on material already in the court record. The prosecutor said he would be in trial through June 17, which the parties cited in choosing a post‑trial hearing date.

On scheduling, the parties agreed the prosecutor’s response would be due approximately two weeks after the defense filing and the defense may file a reply seven days after the state's response; the record references the state's response being set for "Tuesday the 30th" and a reply deadline of June 7. The court placed the waiver hearing on the calendar for June 22 at 3 p.m.

The transcript displays inconsistent spellings for the name of the defense counsel referenced on the record (appearing as both "Mr. Bartlett" and "Mr. Bartley"); the court record used in this article preserves the transcript spelling rather than substituting an unverified full name.

No formal evidentiary hearing was set; the scheduling exchange focused on briefing deadlines and availability. The court’s order on the motion, any subsequent filings, and whether an evidentiary hearing will ultimately be required will be reflected in future entries on the docket.