Logan City v. Liu

Logan City v. Liu

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
 

----ooOoo----

Logan City,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Charles I. Liu,

Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20040847-CA
 

F I L E D
(December 2, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 457

 

-----

First District, Logan Department

The Honorable Gordon J. Low

Attorneys: Charles I. Liu, Logan, Appellant Pro Se

Lee Edwards, Logan, for Appellee

-----

Before Judges Billings, Bench, and Orme.

PER CURIAM:

    Charles Liu appeals his conviction of failure to yield after a trial de novo in district court. This matter is before the court on its own motion for summary disposition due to lack of jurisdiction.

    Liu was originally charged and convicted in justice court. Liu appealed his justice court conviction to the district court pursuant to Utah Code section 78-5-120. See Utah Code Ann. § 78-5-120 (2002). After a trial de novo, the district court convicted Liu of failure to yield.

    Utah Code section 78-5-120 provides the process of appeal from justice court decisions. An appeal from a justice court decision may be taken to the district court, which will then hold a trial de novo. See id. § 78-5-120(3). The district court's decision after a trial de novo "is final and may not be appealed unless the district court rules on the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance." Id. § 78-5-120(7). This section specifically limits further appellate jurisdiction over matters originating in justice court to determinations of constitutionality issues. See State v. Hinson, 966 P.2d 273, 276 (Utah Ct. App. 1998). Thus, "absent an issue regarding the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance, the decision of the district court is final and this court has no jurisdiction to hear an appeal thereof." Id. at 277-78.

    The district court made no rulings regarding the constitutionality of the statute or ordinance under which Liu was convicted. Thus, the district court's decision is final and may not be appealed to this court. This court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal.

    Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

______________________________

Judith M. Billings,

Presiding Judge

______________________________

Russell W. Bench,

Associate Presiding Judge

______________________________

Gregory K. Orme, Judge