State v. Boswell

Court of Appeals of Utah

State v. Boswell

2011 UT App 315, 262 P.3d 488, 691 Utah Adv. Rep. 26, 2011 Utah App. LEXIS 316, 2011 WL 4090417

CourtCourt of Appeals of Utah

DecidedSeptember 15, 2011

Docket20110603-CA

StatusPublished

This text of 2011 UT App 315 (State v. Boswell) 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. Boswell, 2011 UT App 315, 262 P.3d 488, 691 Utah Adv. Rep. 26, 2011 Utah App. LEXIS 316, 2011 WL 4090417 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

DECISION

PER CURIAM:

[ 1 Derek Kyle Boswell seeks to appeal his plea-based convictions for possession of a controlled substance and failure to respond to a police officer. This matter is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition based upon lack of jurisdiction due to Boswell's failure to file a timely notice of appeal. See Utah R.App. P. 4(a). Boswell did not file a response to the court's motion.

12 A notice of appeal must be filed "with the clerk of the trial court within 80 days after the date of entry of the judgment or order appealed from." Id. If an appeal is not timely filed, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal and must dismiss. See Serrato v. Utah Transit Auth., 2000 UT App 299, ¶ 7, 18 P.3d 616.

I 3 Boswell entered pleas of guilty on February 26, 2009. The court entered Boswell's sentence March 17, 2009. Therefore, if Boswell wished to appeal his sentence, he was required to file his notice of appeal within thirty days of that date. However, Boswell *489 did not file his pro se notice of appeal until July 8, 2011. Thus, the notice of appeal was untimely. - Because Boswell did not timely file his notice of appeal, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal and has no choice but to dismiss it. See Varian-Eimac, Inc. v. Lamoreaux, 767 P.2d 569, 570 (Utah Ct.App.1989).

( 4 The appeal is dismissed.

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

DECISION

PER CURIAM:

[ 1 Derek Kyle Boswell seeks to appeal his plea-based convictions for possession of a controlled substance and failure to respond to a police officer. This matter is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition based upon lack of jurisdiction due to Boswell's failure to file a timely notice of appeal. See Utah R.App. P. 4(a). Boswell did not file a response to the court's motion.

12 A notice of appeal must be filed "with the clerk of the trial court within 80 days after the date of entry of the judgment or order appealed from." Id. If an appeal is not timely filed, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal and must dismiss. See Serrato v. Utah Transit Auth., 2000 UT App 299, ¶ 7, 18 P.3d 616.

I 3 Boswell entered pleas of guilty on February 26, 2009. The court entered Boswell's sentence March 17, 2009. Therefore, if Boswell wished to appeal his sentence, he was required to file his notice of appeal within thirty days of that date. However, Boswell *489 did not file his pro se notice of appeal until July 8, 2011. Thus, the notice of appeal was untimely. - Because Boswell did not timely file his notice of appeal, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal and has no choice but to dismiss it. See Varian-Eimac, Inc. v. Lamoreaux, 767 P.2d 569, 570 (Utah Ct.App.1989).

( 4 The appeal is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2011 UT App 315, 262 P.3d 488, 691 Utah Adv. Rep. 26, 2011 Utah App. LEXIS 316, 2011 WL 4090417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-boswell-utahctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack