The Utah Supreme Court issued an opinion in State v. Blackwing, a case involving a defendant charged with orchestrating an attempted murder plot from his jail cell to prevent a teenage rape victim from testifying against him. The court heard an interlocutory appeal on evidentiary issues in the complex criminal conspiracy case.
Kain Blackwing stands charged with orchestrating the attempted murder of 14-year-old C.G. to prevent her from testifying that he raped her, according to the court opinion filed Nov. 28, 2025. From his jail cell where he awaited trial on the rape charge, Blackwing allegedly directed three women with whom he had a polygamous relationship to murder C.G. and her parents in their home.
The murder plot ultimately failed, and the state charged Blackwing with solicitation, conspiracy, and attempted murder in addition to the underlying rape charge. The case represents a complex intersection of sexual assault, witness intimidation, and polygamous relationships in Utah criminal law.
The Utah Supreme Court's involvement stems from an interlocutory appeal filed by the state regarding evidentiary issues. The state filed a notice of intent to introduce various categories of evidence that it characterized as "intrinsic," meaning evidence that "would be considered part of the case narrative and have important probative value that bears directly on the crime charged."
Justice Hagen authored the opinion for the court, joined by Chief Justice Durrant, Associate Chief Justice Pearce, Justice Petersen, and Justice Pohlman. The unanimous decision addresses the admissibility standards for evidence in cases involving complex criminal conspiracies.
The case originated in the Third District Court in West Jordan under Judge A. Chelsea Koch. The underlying criminal case carries the number 171400665, while the Supreme Court appeal was designated as case number 20230752. Oral arguments were heard by the high court on May 13, 2025.
The state is represented by Attorney General Derek E. Brown and Special Assistant Solicitor General Christopher A. Bates from Salt Lake City. Blackwing is represented by Trevor J. Lee from Park City.
The attempted murder plot allegedly involved Blackwing directing three women in polygamous relationships with him to carry out the killings. The plan targeted not only the teenage victim but also her parents, suggesting an effort to eliminate the entire family to prevent testimony in the rape case.
The case highlights the challenges prosecutors face in cases involving witness intimidation, particularly when defendants attempt to orchestrate violence from jail to prevent testimony. The evidentiary issues before the Supreme Court likely center on what evidence can be admitted to show the defendant's motive and the scope of the alleged conspiracy.
Interlocutory appeals allow higher courts to review certain legal issues before a trial concludes, typically when the issues involve important questions of law that could significantly affect the proceedings. The Utah Supreme Court's decision to hear the appeal suggests the evidentiary questions raised have broader implications for criminal prosecutions in the state.
The polygamous aspect of the case adds another layer of complexity to the criminal conspiracy charges. Utah has a history of prosecuting cases involving polygamous relationships, and this case represents a particularly serious alleged crime involving multiple defendants connected through such relationships.
The case underscores the serious nature of witness intimidation charges in Utah's criminal justice system. When defendants allegedly attempt to orchestrate violence against witnesses, particularly minors, prosecutors must navigate complex evidentiary issues to present their case effectively while ensuring due process protections.
The attempted murder charges suggest that the alleged plot progressed beyond mere threats or intimidation to actual planning and preparation for violence. The conspiracy charges indicate that multiple individuals were allegedly involved in planning the murders.
The Supreme Court's ruling on the evidentiary issues will likely have implications for how similar cases are prosecuted in Utah. The decision may establish precedent for what types of evidence can be admitted in complex conspiracy cases involving witness intimidation.
The case is still subject to revision before final publication in the Pacific Reporter, indicating that while the court has issued its opinion, minor changes may still be made before the official publication. This is standard practice for court opinions before they become part of the permanent legal record.
The timing of the case, with oral arguments in May 2025 and the opinion filed in November 2025, reflects the complex nature of the legal issues involved and the court's careful consideration of the evidentiary questions presented.