The Utah Court of Appeals has reversed the convictions of Michael Charles Mclain, who had been convicted on five counts of child sexual abuse, including three counts of rape of a child and one count of attempted rape of a child. The reversal was based on the district court’s failure to ensure Mclain knowingly and intelligently waived his right to legal counsel. The court remanded the case for further proceedings.
Despite this reversal, the appellate court rejected Mclain’s challenge to the attempted rape of a child conviction, finding sufficient evidence supported that charge and allowing it to be retried.
Key Issues on Appeal
The court addressed two core legal issues:
- Did Mclain knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel?
- Was there sufficient evidence to support the attempted rape of a child charge (Count 5)?
1. Violation of Right to Counsel
Mclain had chosen to represent himself at trial after initially being appointed a public defender because of indigency. However, the Court of Appeals determined the trial court failed to conduct a proper waiver colloquy—a required process to ensure a defendant is making an informed and voluntary decision to waive their right to counsel.
Key points:
- The record lacked a sufficient colloquy explaining the risks and disadvantages of self-representation.
- The only discussion of self-representation occurred prior to a finding that Mclain was incompetent.
- The State conceded the error, acknowledging that a new trial is necessary under recent appellate precedent (e.g., State v. Lee, 2024 UT App 2).
Result: The court reversed all convictions and ordered a new trial.
2. Attempted Rape of a Child – Sufficient Evidence Found
Despite the reversal, the court addressed Mclain’s argument that the evidence supporting his attempted rape of a child conviction (Count 5) was insufficient, which could have barred retrial under double jeopardy protections.
Mclain argued:
- There was no clear “substantial step” toward rape.
- His actions could have indicated other motives or lesser conduct.
- The district court should have granted a directed verdict, even without a defense motion.
The Court disagreed:
- The victim testified Mclain entered her room, shut the door, got on top of her, and she had to physically fight him off.
- Her testimony suggested she believed Mclain was attempting sexual intercourse “again”, referencing prior rape incidents.
- The jury was entitled to consider this context as circumstantial evidence of intent and action toward completing the crime.
Result: The court ruled that a reasonable jury could find a substantial step and intent, so retrial on this count is permitted.
Practical Takeaways
- Waiver of counsel requires more than a verbal declaration. Courts must ensure the waiver is knowing and intelligent, especially in serious felony cases.
- Hybrid representation (mixing pro se and standby counsel) is not recognized in Utah, though standby counsel alone is allowed.
- Prior acts against the same victim may be used to show intent in sexual assault cases, provided the jury is properly instructed and the use is legally sound.
What’s Next?
The case returns to the Eighth District Court for a new trial. The attempted rape charge (Count 5) remains active and retriable. On remand, the court will need to follow the proper process for any waiver of counsel and ensure full compliance with constitutional safeguards.
Final Thoughts
State v. Mclain is a sharp reminder of the courts’ constitutional obligations when a defendant waives counsel—especially in complex, high-stakes felony cases. While the reversal resets the trial, the ruling affirms that child victim testimony, when credible and detailed, can support serious charges, even where a completed act didn’t occur.