Law Enforcement Transparency Reporting in Utah

2018 Annual Report



Utah Code 77-7-8.5, directs all Utah Law enforcement agencies to report anytime they deploy a tactical group or when a forcible entry is made. The Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ) is tasked with summarizing these annual reporting requirements.

The Utah Law Enforcement Transparency (LET) reporting interface was added to the Utah Criminal Justice Information System (UCJIS) in 2014. CCJJ paid to build the interface on UCJIS using federal grant funding from the U.S. Department of Justice - Justice Assistance Grant. Law Enforcement agencies throughout the state utilize the UCJIS-LET site to report tactical group deployments and forcible entry incidents as they occur throughout the year. A reportable incident is defined as:

  • anytime a forcible entry is made while serving a warrant or;
  • anytime a “Tactical Group” is deployed (SWAT, Drug Task Force, etc.) and/or makes a forcible entry with or without a warrant.

All Utah Law Enforcement Agencies are responsible for reporting forcible entry incidents and tactical team deployments through-out the year. As a reminder, CCJJ uses a comprehensive email contact list of Utah law enforcement agencies and task forces directing them to report on the UCJIS-LET site at the end of each year. It should be emphasized that the information presented in this report is only as accurate and complete as the data reported by each individual law enforcement agency and their willingness to provide it.

Key Findings

There were 195 forcible entries that occurred out of the 424 total incidents reported in 2018 (46%). The remaining 229 incidents involved tactical team deployments without forced entry or warrants served where forcible entry was not necessary. While increasing between 2016 and 2017, the number of reported incidents declined between 2017 and 2018.

Close to 1/3 of these incidents occurred in Salt Lake County, which was followed by Utah and Cache County at 20 and 17 percent respectively. Similar to other years’ findings, the majority of the reason for law enforcement deployment pertained to drug crimes (76%), followed by “evidence” (10%), property crimes (5%), and person crimes (4%).1 A threat assessment was completed 84 percent of the time.

Warrants were obtained in 98 percent of the reported incidents (up from 94% in 2017), with tactical groups obtaining warrants at a higher rate than non-tactical and drug-task force groups. The vast majority of all warrants pertained to drug crimes (78%), followed by non-violent persons crimes (8%), violent crimes against persons and property crimes (at 7% respectively).

Similar to previous years, “No-Knock-Night” and “Knock & Announce-Day” warrants were obtained in the majority of all reported incidents (>70%). This was followed by “Knock & Announce-Night” (16%) and “No-Knock-Day” (6%). Evidence was seized in more than 95 percent of the reported incidents, with property being seized 11 percent of the time. The mean number of arrests across all incidents was 1.8 (median=1, min=0, max=11).

Weapons (including non-firearms) were brandished by suspects in 10 of the 424 reported incidents (2%). One incident involved firearms being used by suspects. This incident pertained to forcible entry.

Three of the reported incidents resulted in officer shots, with four civilians being injured and one reported fatality. There were no enforcement officer injuries or deaths associated with the 424 reported incidents. None of the incidents resulted in an animal being injured or killed.

Selected Figures

Figures 1-4. Trends in Incident Reporting: 2014 - 2018

Figure 5. Breakdown of Warrant Nature 2018: The reason that a judge issued a warrant pertained to drugs 78 percent of the time (n=325). Thirty-five (8%) of the reported incidents pertained to person crimes, followed by violent crimes against persons and property (at 7 and 6% respectively).



Law Enforcement Transparency Reports: 2014-17. Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice. Available at

  1. The remaining reasons for deployment included felony warrant, alcohol, violent felony warrant, barricaded suspect, hostage, and suicidal subject.