State v. Bodily

Annotate this Case
State v. Bodily

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

State of Utah,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Brent Bingham Bodily,

Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20030660-CA
 

F I L E D
(April 29, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 136

 

-----

Second District, Farmington Department

The Honorable Darwin C. Hansen

Attorneys: Joseph W. O'Keefe Jr., Ogden, for Appellant

Mark L. Shurtleff and Matthew D. Bates, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

-----

Before Judges Billings, Orme, and Thorne.

PER CURIAM:

Brent Bodily appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence pursuant to a conditional guilty plea. This is before the court on the State's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Bodily pleaded guilty on July 9, 2003, preserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence. He filed his notice of appeal on July 30, 2003. Sentencing was set for September, but was delayed pending consideration of a motion for a certificate of probable cause. In October, the trial court granted Bodily a certificate of probable cause, permitting him to remain free during appeal. In the certificate of probable cause, the trial court stayed the imposition of Bodily's sentence pending his appeal.

Generally, an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment. See Utah R. App. P. 3(a). The final judgment in a criminal case is the entry of the sentence. See State v. Johnson, 700 P.2d 1125, 1127 (Utah 1985); State v. Walker, 2002 UT App 290,¶11, 55 P.3d 1165. It is undisputed that Bodily has not been sentenced, and thus there is no final appealable order in place.

This court therefore lacks jurisdiction, and must dismiss the appeal. This appeal is dismissed without prejudice to the filing of a timely appeal after a final judgment has been entered.

______________________________

Judith M. Billings,

Presiding Judge

______________________________

Gregory K. Orme, Judge

______________________________

William A. Thorne Jr., Judge

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.