State v. Boren

Court of Appeals of Utah

State v. Boren

856 P.2d 692, 217 Utah Adv. Rep. 21, 1993 Utah App. LEXIS 117, 1993 WL 259425

CourtCourt of Appeals of Utah

DecidedJuly 9, 1993

DocketNo. 930275-CA

StatusPublished

This text of 856 P.2d 692 (State v. Boren) 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

State v. Boren, 856 P.2d 692, 217 Utah Adv. Rep. 21, 1993 Utah App. LEXIS 117, 1993 WL 259425 (Utah Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This case is before the court on appellant’s petition for certificate of probable cause. We deny the petition without prejudice for failure to comply with State v. Neeley, 707 P.2d 647 (Utah 1985).

State v. Neeley requires that a petition for certificate of probable cause filed in an appellate court be accompanied by an affidavit containing “a statement of the crime for which the defendant was convicted; the sentence imposed; whether the defendant has previously applied to the district court for a certificate of probable cause and, if so, whether the issues presented were the same as those presented to this Court; the ruling of the district court on the issues; and the bases or reasons for the court’s ruling.” Id. at 649.

The affidavit filed in this case states that the district court denied a request for a certificate of probable cause, but it fails to state whether the issues presented to the district court were the same as those presented to this court, the ruling of the district court on those issues, and the bases or reasons for the court’s ruling. It is not sufficient that appellant has shown that the issues forming the basis for appeal were raised in the trial court. In order to comply with Neeley, appellant must also demonstrate that those issues were also raised in the trial court in distinct proceedings seeking a certificate of probable cause, and [693]*693must set forth the trial court’s ruling and the bases or reasons for the ruling.

On the basis of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for certificate of probable cause is denied without prejudice to allowing appellant to file an affidavit that fully complies with Nee-ley.1

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

ORDER

This case is before the court on appellant’s petition for certificate of probable cause. We deny the petition without prejudice for failure to comply with State v. Neeley, 707 P.2d 647 (Utah 1985).

State v. Neeley requires that a petition for certificate of probable cause filed in an appellate court be accompanied by an affidavit containing “a statement of the crime for which the defendant was convicted; the sentence imposed; whether the defendant has previously applied to the district court for a certificate of probable cause and, if so, whether the issues presented were the same as those presented to this Court; the ruling of the district court on the issues; and the bases or reasons for the court’s ruling.” Id. at 649.

The affidavit filed in this case states that the district court denied a request for a certificate of probable cause, but it fails to state whether the issues presented to the district court were the same as those presented to this court, the ruling of the district court on those issues, and the bases or reasons for the court’s ruling. It is not sufficient that appellant has shown that the issues forming the basis for appeal were raised in the trial court. In order to comply with Neeley, appellant must also demonstrate that those issues were also raised in the trial court in distinct proceedings seeking a certificate of probable cause, and [693]*693must set forth the trial court’s ruling and the bases or reasons for the ruling.

On the basis of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for certificate of probable cause is denied without prejudice to allowing appellant to file an affidavit that fully complies with Nee-ley.1

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

856 P.2d 692, 217 Utah Adv. Rep. 21, 1993 Utah App. LEXIS 117, 1993 WL 259425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-boren-utahctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack