Salt Lake City v. Griffin

Court of Appeals of Utah

Salt Lake City v. Griffin

750 P.2d 194, 76 Utah Adv. Rep. 9, 1988 Utah App. LEXIS 195, 1987 WL 42383

CourtCourt of Appeals of Utah

DecidedFebruary 12, 1988

Docket870194-CA

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 750 P.2d 194 (Salt Lake City v. Griffin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Utah primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Salt Lake City v. Griffin, 750 P.2d 194, 76 Utah Adv. Rep. 9, 1988 Utah App. LEXIS 195, 1987 WL 42383 (Utah Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM:

The notice of appeal in the above-captioned case was filed with this court on May 22, 1987. A docketing statement was filed on June 16, 1987 stating that the appeal was from “a final Order of Conviction of the Circuit Court” and that the date of the “Judgment or Order sought to be reviewed is the date of conviction, to-wit: March 23, 1987 by a city jury.” On June 19, 1987, this court rejected appellant’s docketing statement, which did not attach a copy of the judgment or order being appealed. Appellant, by way of an Amendment to Docketing Statement, provided a copy of the computer docket sheet from the Fifth Circuit Court “demonstrating that the sentencing in this matter took place on 4/21/87.” The appeal proceeded to briefing.

This court now has the entire record of proceedings in the Fifth Circuit Court before it. A review of the record reveals no judgment or sentencing order signed by the trial court supporting the computerized docket entry provided by appellant. Because no signed judgment or order appears in the record, we are without jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal due to the absence of a final judgment. R.Utah Ct.App. 3(a); see Sather v. Gross, 727 P.2d 212 (Utah 1986) (per curiam); Utah State Tax Comm’n v. Erekson, 714 P.2d 1151 (Utah 1986) (per curiam).

*195 The appeal is dismissed on the basis that this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal. R.Utah Ct.App. 10(e). No costs are awarded.

GARFF, JACKSON and ORME, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM:

The notice of appeal in the above-captioned case was filed with this court on May 22, 1987. A docketing statement was filed on June 16, 1987 stating that the appeal was from “a final Order of Conviction of the Circuit Court” and that the date of the “Judgment or Order sought to be reviewed is the date of conviction, to-wit: March 23, 1987 by a city jury.” On June 19, 1987, this court rejected appellant’s docketing statement, which did not attach a copy of the judgment or order being appealed. Appellant, by way of an Amendment to Docketing Statement, provided a copy of the computer docket sheet from the Fifth Circuit Court “demonstrating that the sentencing in this matter took place on 4/21/87.” The appeal proceeded to briefing.

This court now has the entire record of proceedings in the Fifth Circuit Court before it. A review of the record reveals no judgment or sentencing order signed by the trial court supporting the computerized docket entry provided by appellant. Because no signed judgment or order appears in the record, we are without jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal due to the absence of a final judgment. R.Utah Ct.App. 3(a); see Sather v. Gross, 727 P.2d 212 (Utah 1986) (per curiam); Utah State Tax Comm’n v. Erekson, 714 P.2d 1151 (Utah 1986) (per curiam).

*195 The appeal is dismissed on the basis that this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal. R.Utah Ct.App. 10(e). No costs are awarded.

GARFF, JACKSON and ORME, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

750 P.2d 194, 76 Utah Adv. Rep. 9, 1988 Utah App. LEXIS 195, 1987 WL 42383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salt-lake-city-v-griffin-utahctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack