Case Name: LINDON CITY, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Raymond STEWART, Defendant and Appellant
Court: Utah Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Utah
Decision Date: 2011-03-10
Citations: 249 P.3d 596
Docket Number: No. 20110036-CA
Parties: LINDON CITY, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Raymond STEWART, Defendant and Appellant.
Judges: Before Judges MeHUGH, THORNE, and CHRISTIANSEN.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 3d
Volume: 249
Pages: 596–596

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.