3 . The statute at that date was similar to the present statute. It provided, " 'Any person who, . without just excuse, deserts or willfully neglects or refuses to provide for the support and maintenance of his or her minor child or children, under the age of sixteen years, in destitute or necessitous circumstances is guilty of a felony.'" Osborn v. Harris, 115 Utah 204, 203 P.2d 917, 920 (1949) (quoting Utah Code Ann. § 103-13-1 (1943)). 4 . Defendant cites cases that involve similar statutory schemes, but are distinguishable because they do not address whether jurisdiction is proper over resident parents for failure to support nonresident children in holding that jurisdiction is proper over nonresident parents. See State v. Sokolaski, 26 Kan.App.2d 333, 987 P.2d 1130, 1131 (1999) (<HOLDING>); State v. Taylor, 625 N.E.2d 1334, 1336
holding that an outofwedlock childs pending claim for retroactive child support was nondischargeable in bankruptcy because a debt for child support arises upon the birth of the child and that the fact that no court had yet ordered the debtor to support the child does not take the debt outside the scope of 11 usc  523a5 holding that it was error for the trial court to determine the issue of child support without a child support guidelines worksheet holding that parents may not voluntarily terminate their rights in a child to avoid child support payments or contract away a child support obligation holding admissible testimony from 2 witnesses that within days immediately preceding the victims departure from kansas city with the defendant the victim stated that she feared that the defendant was going to kill her where the defendant claimed accident holding kansas could prosecute nonresident parent for failure to support kansas resident child because the criminal nonsupport occurred partly in kansas and the proximate result of the defendants actions the failure to provide support for the child occurred within kansas