This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
According to a prosecutor, the FBI must hand over any evidence gathered in its investigation of former Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, because it agreed to work with state prosecutors — and follow state laws — when the U.S. Department of Justice abandoned its own case in 2013.
"It's not governed by the Department of Justice (DOJ)," Davis County Attorney Rawlings said in a 3rd District Court motion filed late Monday. "This is a state case."
The filing is the latest in a squabble between Rawlings and the DOJ over access to a trove of FBI evidence related to Shurtleff and his successor, former Utah Attorney General John Swallow.
The DOJ's Public Integrity Section declined to prosecute the former Utah attorneys general, but local FBI agents stayed on the case, working with state and county investigators.
Federal attorneys contend the FBI has met it obligations to Rawlings. Any additional requests, they say, are subject to federal evidence regulations, which the prosecutor has not met.
Third District Judge Elizabeth Hruby-Mills is scheduled to hear oral argument on the issue Dec. 1.
Before she does, Rawlings wants the judge to have access to a sealed Sept. 17, 2013, federal court order, which court papers say settles any questions about the case jurisdiction and codified the relationship between the FBI and state prosecutors.
The federal government, Rawlings argues, shouldn't get to change its mind.
"The DOJ does not get a mulligan because a state prosecutor is interested in the full scope of the case …" Rawlings wrote. "Particularly when, to their credit, local FBI agents were in tune with the overlap of the full scope of the case."
Shurtleff, who was Utah's attorney general for 12 years, pleaded not guilty in June to five felony and two misdemeanor charges, including counts of accepting prohibited gifts, obstructing justice, extortion or bribery to dismiss a criminal proceeding, and misconduct. A trial is set for May.
Shurtleff's attorneys, who have joined Rawlings in seeking a court order to force the release of evidence from the FBI, believe it may exonerate the former GOP officeholder.
Last month, DOJ attorneys from Colorado — handling the case because Utah is recused — said the FBI has already turned over "hundreds of thousands" of relevant documents or electronic records.
While Utah is "grateful" for the data received, Rawlings has said that Utah law gives prosecutors, not police, the power to decide the relevance of evidence in all circumstances.
Additionally, he said in court papers, the volume of the material has no bearing on the state's obligation to provide it to any defendant.
"The constitutions of the state of Utah and the United States of America do not have provisions that indicate once the government hands over 100,000 pages they are good to go and can stop," Rawlings wrote. "If there is a 100,001st, it must also be provided."