State of Utah, in the interest of A.B.

State of Utah, in the interest of A.B., a person under eighteen years of age, Case No. 2000026-CA, Filed April 6, 2000 IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

State of Utah, in the interest of A.B.,
a person under eighteen years of age.
______________________________

S.B.,
Petitioner,

v.

State of Utah,
Respondent.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)

Case No. 20000206-CA

F I L E D
April 6, 2000
  2000 UT App 101 -----

Original Proceeding in this Court

Attorneys:
Candace S. Bridgess, Ogden, for Petitioner
Jan Graham and John Peterson, Salt Lake City, for Respondent
Martha Pierce, Salt Lake City, Guardian Ad Litem

-----

Before Judges Jackson, Bench and Billings.

PER CURIAM:

S.B., the natural mother of A.B., seeks an extraordinary writ to reverse and set aside the findings of the juvenile court and to immediately return A.B. to her custody.

This court may not exercise its discretion to enter an extraordinary writ unless the petitioner has "'no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy'" at law. State v. Stirba, 972 P.2d 918, 921 (Utah Ct. App. 1998) (quoting Utah R. Civ. P. 65B(a)). Accordingly, a petitioner is required to state "the reasons why no other plain, speedy, or adequate remedy exists and why the writ should issue." Utah R. App. P. 19(b)(4). S.B. has failed to address this requirement, and we conclude that she had a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy through a direct appeal.

The issues in the petition should have been raised in an appeal from the Adjudication Order entered on November 26, 1999. Our January 21, 2000 order denying S.B.'s petition for permission to appeal from an interlocutory order advised her that (1) the Adjudication Order was final and appealable and (2) she "must seek an extension of the time to appeal in the trial court and, if it is granted, must file a notice of appeal in the trial court within the time allowed by [Utah] Rule [of Appellate Procedure] 4(e)."

S.B. failed to file a timely direct appeal and failed to seek an extension of the time for appeal prior to the expiration of the time allowed for such motions under Rule 4(e). Having failed to avail herself of her right to appeal, S.B. now seeks reversal of the Adjudication Order through this petition. "'By ignoring a plain, speedy and adequate remedy at law, [S.B.] placed [herself] out of reach of the extraordinary writ of mandamus.'" Merrihew v. Salt Lake County Planning, 659 P.2d 1065, 1067 (Utah 1983) (quoting Crist v. Mapleton City, 28 Utah 2d 7, 9, 497 P.2d 633, 634 (1972)). An extraordinary writ petition cannot be used as a substitute for appeal. See id. S.B. is not entitled to obtain extraordinary relief based upon her inaction.

Accordingly, we deny the request for extraordinary relief and dismiss the petition.
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Norman H. Jackson,
Associate Presiding Judge
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Russell W. Bench, Judge
 
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Judith M. Billings, Judge