The Utah Attorney General’s Office said Monday there is not enough evidence against Durango environmentalist Rose Chilcoat to bring her case to trial.
“This means the charges against her will be dismissed,” Utah State Courts spokesman Geoff Fattah said Tuesday.
However, her husband, Mark Franklin, also charged in the incident, is likely headed to trial.
“I am very encouraged by the path the Utah Court of Appeal is taking,” Chilcoat wrote in an email to The Durango Herald on Tuesday. “I look forward to putting these criminal charges behind me and focusing on my husband, Mark’s, trial and acquittal.”
Chilcoat and Franklin were hit with felony and misdemeanor charges after being accused of trying to kill cattle in April 2017 when the couple allegedly closed a corral gate on state trust land between Bluff and Mexican Hat in southeastern Utah.
For the past year, the couple’s defense attorneys have attempted to have the charges dismissed by arguing that the prosecution is an act of retaliation for Chilcoat’s yearslong environmental work in San Juan County.
Utah’s 7th Judicial District Judge Lyle Anderson previously ruled there was enough evidence to send the case to trial. Chilcoat’s and Franklin’s attorneys filed a petition to the Utah Court of Appeals to reverse the decision. The court has yet to file an official ruling.
On July 9, the appeals court held a hearing in Salt Lake City that indicated it was leaning toward dismissing Chilcoat’s charges.
“There seems to be no case against her, no probable cause,” Judge Gregory Orme said. “Maybe the state will come up with something between now and (the trial), but it seems they have precious little against her, as opposed to (Franklin).”
The state of Utah had until July 31 to make a case to the court about why it should pursue charges. On Monday, however, the Utah Attorney General’s Office said it would not pursue charges against Chilcoat, effectively dismissing them, Fattah said.
Chilcoat’s attorney, Paul Cassell, said the decision is a major victory for the former associate director of the Great Old Broads for Wilderness, who lives in Durango, where the environmental nonprofit is headquartered.
“We’re happy to see the state of Utah is not going to defend the flimsy case against Rose and look forward to it being dismissed rapidly,” Cassell told the Herald on Tuesday.
Attempts to reach San Juan County Attorney Kendall Laws, who filed the charges against the couple, were unsuccessful Tuesday afternoon.
Franklin’s request to reverse a previous court’s decision to send his case to trial was dismissed. Franklin has the choice to appeal again to the Utah Supreme Court or take the case to trial. As of Tuesday, no trial date had been set.
“We’re evaluating all options for Mark, but we’re confident that if this case ultimately goes to trial, he will be swiftly vindicated,” Cassell said.
On April 1, 2017, Utah rancher Zane Odell noticed the gate to a corral was closed. The incident was reportedly caught on a trail camera and captured images of the vehicle that stopped at the gate.
Two days later, Odell noticed the same vehicle that was caught on camera pass by again, so he notified the San Juan County Sheriff’s Office. Franklin admitted to closing the gate when questioned by officers.
Chilcoat and Franklin were let go without charges. One of the responding deputies told a supervisor: “I think all we’d have is probably just trespassing. I don’t even think it was criminal trespassing.”
Nine days later, however, the San Juan County Attorney’s Office filed felony charges against the couple.
Chilcoat and Franklin maintain there was a wide opening in the fence that still allowed cattle access to water. Odell, too, said there was a 10-foot opening in the fence 50 yards away but argued the couple’s critical views of grazing on public lands was the impetus for closing the gate, hoping cattle would die.
Franklin has not offered a detailed explanation of why he closed the gate, other than he was “helping” the rancher.
The couple also maintain the charges are retaliation against Chilcoat, who for years worked on public land and grazing issues in San Juan County, where the issues are contentious.
Anderson granted a motion in May to move the trial to Price, Utah, after determining the couple would not receive a fair trial in San Juan County.
“If jurors and prospective jurors know defendants are associated with the Great Old Broads,” Anderson wrote, “it is difficult to see how this court can seat an impartial jury.”
jromeo@durangoherald.com
