¶ 21 The bindover standard is intended to leave the principal fact finding to the jury. Talbot, 972 P.2d 435, 438 (Utah 1998) (explaining that a preliminary hearing “is not a trial on the merits, only a gateway to the finder of fact”).But the standard nevertheless gives magistrates discretion to discontinue groundless prosecutions.¶ 20 First, the standard serves to ferret out groundless and improvident prosecutions at the preliminary hearing stage.Under the probable cause standard, the prosecution has the burden of producing “believable evidence of all the elements of the crime charged,” but this evidence does not need to be “capable of supporting a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Clark, 2001 UT 9, ¶ 15, 20 P.3d 300 (internal quotation marks omitted).Later that night, M.'s mother confirmed to Stewart that M.'s account was untrue and indicated that M. Stewart's statement also notes two times where she left Virgin and M.
told of going rollerblading with her parents, and described her pink and white, mermaid rollerblades.Properly construed and applied, the probable cause standard does not constitute a rubber stamp for the prosecution but, rather, provides a meaningful opportunity for magistrates to ferret out groundless and improvident prosecutions.We take this opportunity to reaffirm and elucidate the boundaries of the probable cause standard in the preliminary hearing context. We now reverse the court of appeals and, in this opinion, address both the standard to be applied by magistrates in making bindover determinations and the standard to be applied by appellate courts in reviewing those determinations. The court of appeals reversed, determining that the State had submitted sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, as this court has defined that term.