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: January 28, 2021

Code of Judicial Administration – Comment Period Closed March 14, 2021

CJA02-0211. Compliance with the Code of Judicial Administration and the Code of Judicial Conduct. AMEND. Expands the ability to report allegations of a failure to comply with the provisions of the CJA and the CJC to any court employee. Allows information identifying the complainant to be omitted from reports to the Judicial Council. If the allegations involve inappropriate behavior toward the complainant, the complainant must be made aware of any corrective action taken. The complainant may ask for Judicial Council review of any decision made by the presiding officer.

This entry was posted in -Code of Judicial Administration, CJA02-0211.

Utah Courts

View more posts from this author

One thought on “Code of Judicial Administration – Comment Period Closed March 14, 2021”

Herschel Bullen

January 30, 2021 at 10:50 am

Proposed criminal rule 42 is inconsistent. “42(b)(2) A case that is dismissed after completion of a plea in abeyance agreement is not eligible for automatic expungement.” This is inconsistent with (b)(1)(A) a case that resulted in an acquittal on all charges;13 (b)(1)(B) except as provided in paragraph (b)(2), a case that is dismissed with prejudice; and 14 (b)(1)(C) a clean slate eligible case.

A PIA results in a “complete dismissal” and with prejudice in many cases and may even be “clean slate” eligible at the end of the abeyance period. So the exclusion of the PIA from automatic expungement doesn’t seem to make logical sense.