Utah Court Rules – Published for Comment

The Supreme Court and Judicial Council invite comments about amending these rules. To view the proposed amendment, click on the rule number.

To submit a comment or view the comments of others, click on “Continue Reading.” To submit a comment, scroll down to the “Leave a Reply” section, and type your comment in the “Comment” field. Type your name and email address in the designated fields and click “Post Comment.”

Comments cannot be acknowledged, but all will be considered. Comments are saved to a buffer for review before publication.

Posted: May 27, 2014

Rules of Appellate Procedure

URAP 035. Petition for rehearing. Amend. Outlines the circumstances under which a petition for rehearing may be filed. Separates parts of the rule into separate subparagraphs. Provides the color for covers of petitions and responses filed under this rule.
URAP 038B. Qualifications for appointed appellate counsel. Amend. Requires that appointed appellate counsel represent a client through the first right of appeal.
URAP 047. Certification and transmission of record; joint and separate petitions; cross-petitions; parties. Rename and amend. Removes the requirement for certification of the record. Provides that the Clerk of the Supreme Court shall notify the Clerk of the Court of Appeals to transmit the record on appeal to the Supreme Court when a petition for certiorari has been granted.

This entry was posted in -Rules of Appellate Procedure, URAP035, URAP038B, URAP047.

Utah Courts

View more posts from this author

One thought on “Rules of Appellate Procedure”

Sam

July 10, 2014 at 9:25 am

I think the amendment to Rule 38B would be helpful if I am interpreting it correctly. As full-time appointed appellate counsel, all of my clients would elect to pursue a cert petition on every case. This creates unnecessary work for both counsel and the court. If the rule allows counsel the discretion as to when cert review is appropriate, then this could eliminate a lot of unnecessary appellate work. Some cases simply do not merit cert review. The rule is unclear, however, that if counsel elects to forego a cert petition and his or her client wishes to pursue review the process for withdrawl and allowance for the client to file a pro se petition. Perhaps that can be governed by other rules currently in place, but I foresee some difficulties there.