Case ID: p3d_249/html/0596-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

2011 UT App 63
    LINDON CITY, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Raymond STEWART, Defendant and Appellant.
    No. 20110036-CA.
    Court of Appeals of Utah.
    March 10, 2011.
    Raymond Stewart, Draper, Appellant Pro Se.
    Brian K. Haws, Pleasant Grove, for Appel-lee.
    Before Judges MeHUGH, THORNE, and CHRISTIANSEN.
   DECISION

PER CURIAM:

T1 Raymond Stewart seeks to appeal his conviction for speeding after a trial de novo in district court. This is before the court on Lindon City's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

T2 Utah Code section 78A-7-118 provides for criminal appeals from justice courts. See Utah Code Ann. § 78A~-7-118 (2008). If a defendant files a timely notice of appeal from a justice court conviction, "a defendant is entitled to a trial de novo in the district court." Id. § "The right to an 'appeal' from a court not of record is satisfied by provision for a trial de novo in a court of record." Dean v. Henriod, 1999 UT App 50, ¶ 9, 975 P.2d 946. "The decision of the district court is final and may not be appealed unless the district court rules on the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance." Utah Code Ann. § 78A-7-118(7).

13 This case originated in justice court. The district court did not rule on the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance in convicting Stewart after a trial de novo. Accordingly, the district court's decision is final and this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal.

[ 4 Dismissed.