Killpack motion denied

PROVO — Jennete Killpack's sullen expression matched the plain, dark blue prison jumpsuit she wore Friday in Provo's 4th District Court.

Twenty-seven days into Killpack's one-to-15-year prison sentence for the death of her 4-year-old adopted daughter, the Springville woman was back in court — this time with shackles on her wrists and ankles.

Judge Claudia Laycock denied the defense motion for a certificate of probable cause, saying none of the presented arguments raised substantial question of law or fact to reasonably result in a reversal of the court's decision or the order of a new trial or sentence.

If granted, a certificate of probable cause can stay a sentence of imprisonment, probation or fine pending appeal.

Killpack's attorney, Mike Esplin, said Laycock's ruling was expected but a necessary step in the appeals process. "You don't expect that the judge is going to say she was wrong," Esplin said after the hearing.

The attorney said he'll appeal the decision to the Utah Court of Appeals.

Killpack, 30, was found guilty by a jury of second-degree felony child abuse homicide following a trial that lasted 3 1/2 weeks. Her husband, Richard, 38, was acquitted.

During the trial, prosecutors said Killpack forced her daughter, Cassandra, to drink about a gallon of water as punishment for taking a sibling's drink on the night of June 9, 2002. The punishment led to the girl's death by water intoxication — a condition that causes the brain to swell and the body's sodium level to drop to a fatal level.

The Killpacks said they gave the girl only about 20 ounces of water and that they do not know how she died.

Richard Killpack was among the family and friends who showed their support for Jennete Killpack in the courtroom Friday through smiles, waves and words of encouragement.

Jennete Killpack turned to face those supporters before being escorted out of the courtroom but didn't return the smiles and waves, instead showing them the somber expression she wore throughout the hearing.

In the motion for a certificate of probable cause, Esplin cited multiple grounds for appeal, chief among them the standard of proof required for the offense.

The position of the government prosecutors, he said, was that it only had to prove the defendants were reckless in that they knew or should have known that their conduct would likely result in serious bodily injury.