Opinion ID: 2721057
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: introduction

Text: ¶1 The question presented in this case is whether a district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to accept a defendant’s guilty plea where the defendant was not bound over following either a preliminary hearing or an express waiver of the right to a STATE v. SMITH Opinion of the Court preliminary hearing.1 The court of appeals held that “a district court cannot exercise its jurisdiction to accept a guilty plea until a defendant has been bound over following either a preliminary hearing or the defendant’s waiver of a preliminary hearing.”2 ¶2 We reverse the court of appeals’ decision and conclude that while it is error for a district court to accept a guilty plea without holding a preliminary hearing or obtaining an express waiver from the defendant of the right to a preliminary hearing, such an error does not deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction. Utah’s current statutory scheme grants district courts broad subject matter jurisdiction over criminal cases. And nothing in the Utah Constitution or Utah Code makes holding a preliminary hearing, obtaining an express waiver of the right to a preliminary hearing, or issuing a bindover order a prerequisite to a district court’s exercise of subject matter jurisdiction.