Enterprise City v. Ence

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ----ooOoo---Enterprise City, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Chance David Ence, Defendant and Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not For Official Publication) Case No. 20090962-CA F I L E D (March 11, 2010) 2010 UT App 59 ----Fifth District, St. George Department, 091501126 The Honorable James L. Shumate Attorneys: Chance David Ence, St. George, Appellant Pro Se Eric R. Gentry, St. George, for Appellee ----- Before Judges Davis, McHugh, and Bench.1 PER CURIAM: Chance David Ence appeals his convictions for speeding and failure to appear on a citation. This matter is before the court on its sua sponte motion for summary disposition based upon lack of jurisdiction. Utah Code section 78A-7-118(7) states that "the decision of the district court [in a case originating in a justice court] is final and may not be appealed unless the district court rules on the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance." Utah Code Ann. § 78A-7-118(7) (2008). Accordingly, "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." State v. Hinson, 966 P.2d 273, 277 (Utah Ct. App. 1998). This case originated in the Enterprise City Justice Court. Ence was found guilty by the justice court. Ence appealed, requesting a trial de novo with the district court. The district court conducted a trial on October 29, 2009, and found Ence guilty of the same crimes. 1 The Honorable Russell W. Bench, Senior Judge, sat by special assignment pursuant to Utah Code section 78A-3-103 (2008) and rule 11-201(6) of the Utah Rules of Judicial Administration. Ence seeks review of the district court's decision. However, the record does not demonstrate that the district court ruled on the constitutionality of any statute or ordinance. Therefore, because this case originated in a justice court and the district court did not rule on the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal. See id. When a court lacks jurisdiction, it "retains only the authority to dismiss the action." Varian-Eimac, Inc. v. Lamoreaux, 767 P.2d 569, 570 (Utah Ct. App. 1989). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. ______________________________ James Z. Davis, Presiding Judge ______________________________ Carolyn B. McHugh, Associate Presiding Judge ______________________________ Russell W. Bench, Senior Judge 20090962-CA 2

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.