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: October 22, 2019
URCP086. Licensed Paralegal Practitioners. NEW. Addresses applicability of Utah Rules of Civil Procedure to Licensed Paralegal Practitioners.
URCP065C. Post-conviction relief. AMEND. Addresses service of post-conviction petitions and the underlying court record.
I think serving the respondent with a copy of the record in (i) makes sense, though it seems that if the respondent gets a copy, a copy should also be sent to the petitioner for use in any reply or amended petition. The petitioner has filed a petition and survived summary disposition likely without unfettered access to the record, Isn’t it fair that if the government gets to respond using the record, the petitioner (who most times is a pro se inmate in a correctional facility) should be able to see what the government is referring to?
I’d suggest adding the following language:
(i) Service of petitions. If, on review of the petition, the court concludes that all or part of the petition
should not be summarily dismissed, the court shall designate the portions of the petition that are not dismissed and direct the clerk to serve a copy of the petition, attachments, and memorandum, and the court record of the underlying criminal case being challenged, including all non-public documents, by mail upon the petitioner and respondent. In lieu of mailing paper copies, the clerk may mail to the respondent a storage medium containing electronic copies of the records enumerated above. The petitioner may request that the record be provided in paper form.
I agree with Doug Thompson but have a comment on his proposed amendment. If the default rule is sending paper to both petitioner and respondent, shouldn’t the last sentence authorize a request by the petitioner for the records in electronic form?