I am a big believer in jury nullification. It is my firm belief that as a jury of fellow men and women, we have the final say on law. It is our duty to decide if laws are unconstitutional, unjust or unfairly applied.Utah Code
Utah Code of Criminal Procedure
Court to determine law; the jury, the facts.
77-17-10. Court to determine law; the jury, the facts.
(1) In a jury trial, questions of law are to be determined by the court, questions of fact by the jury.
(2) The jury may find a general verdict which includes questions of law as well as fact but they are bound to follow the law as stated by the court.
Enacted by Chapter 15, 1980 General Session
The following is borrowed from ISIL or the International society for individual liberty.
http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/histo ... -null.html"Jury nullification of law," as it is sometimes called, is a traditional right that was rigorously defended by America's Founding Fathers. Those great men, Patriots all, intended the jury to serve as a final safeguard – a test that laws must pass before gaining sufficient popular authority for enforcement. Thus the Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power – representatives, senate, executive, judges – and finally juries. Each enactment of law must pass all these hurdles before it gains the authority to punish those who may choose to violate it.
So my question is: does this section nullify or criminalize the jury's ability to decide the application of the law?