Utah Supreme Court
Can you seek certiorari review of intermediate court of appeals decisions? State v. Epling Explained
Summary
David Epling sought certiorari review of an intermediate court of appeals decision that dismissed his ineffective assistance claims while retaining jurisdiction over his sentencing appeal. The Utah Supreme Court dismissed the petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Analysis
In State v. Epling, the Utah Supreme Court clarified the timing requirements for seeking certiorari review of court of appeals decisions, holding that petitions must await final—not intermediate—decisions.
Background and Facts: David Epling pled no contest to sexual abuse charges and later appealed his consecutive sentences. During the appeal, he filed a Rule 23B motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his plea. The court of appeals dismissed the ineffective assistance claims for lack of jurisdiction but retained jurisdiction over the sentencing issue. Epling then sought certiorari review of this intermediate decision.
Key Legal Issues: The central question was whether the Utah Supreme Court had jurisdiction to review an intermediate decision of the court of appeals via petition for certiorari when the appeal remained pending on other issues.
Court’s Analysis and Holding: The court examined Rule 48 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, which requires petitions for certiorari to be filed “within 30 days after the entry of the final decision by the Court of Appeals.” The court emphasized that interpreting “final decision” to include intermediate decisions would render the word “final” superfluous. Since the sentencing issue remained pending before the court of appeals, no final decision had been entered. The court dismissed the petition without prejudice, noting that Epling could seek certiorari review after the court of appeals issued its final decision on all pending issues.
Practice Implications: This decision establishes clear timing requirements for appellate procedure in Utah. Practitioners must wait for complete resolution of appeals before seeking Supreme Court review. While the court acknowledged it had previously reviewed intermediate decisions without considering the jurisdictional issue, it declined to treat the certiorari petition as a petition for extraordinary writ. This ruling provides certainty about when certiorari petitions are timely and proper.
Case Details
Case Name
State v. Epling
Citation
2010 UT 53
Court
Utah Supreme Court
Case Number
No. 20100375
Date Decided
October 1, 2010
Outcome
Dismissed
Holding
The Utah Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review an intermediate decision of the court of appeals by petition for certiorari until after entry of the court of appeals’ final decision.
Standard of Review
Not applicable – jurisdictional determination
Practice Tip
File petitions for certiorari only after the court of appeals issues its final decision on all issues in the appeal, not after intermediate rulings.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.