State of Utah v. LoveAnnotate this Case
State of Utah,
Plaintiff and Appellee,
Defendant and Appellant.
(Not For Official Publication)
Case No. 20000794-CA
F I L E D
March 8, 2001 2001 UT App 79 -----
Third District, West Valley
The Honorable Paul G. Maughan
William Love aka William Maiben, Salt Lake City, Appellant Pro Se -----
Before Judges Jackson, Bench, and Davis.
This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary dismissal. Appellant did not respond.
Appellant seeks to appeal from his conviction following a no contest plea to the offense of Stalking, a class A misdemeanor, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-106.5 (1999). The trial court entered its judgment and sentence on October 29, 1999. Appellant did not seek to withdraw his no contest plea and did not file a timely appeal from the judgment or sentence. Following a hearing held on August 16, 2000, the trial court revoked appellant's probation, imposed a ten day jail sentence, and reinstated probation for twelve months beginning on that date. Although the docket contains a minute entry reflecting the disposition, no signed judgment has been entered in the trial court record. Appellant filed a notice of appeal purportedly taken from the original judgment and the probation revocation on September 8, 2000.
We lack jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal. Appellant did not file a notice of appeal within thirty days of entry of the October 29, 1999 judgment, as required by Rule 4(a) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure. Contrary to the suggestion in appellant's docketing statement, probation revocation proceedings do not constitute a post-judgment motion to amend the judgment that extends the time for appeal from the original judgment under Rule 4(b) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure. "Failure to file a timely notice of appeal deprives this court of jurisdiction over the appeal." Reisbeck v. HCA Health Servs., 2000 UT 48,¶5, 2 P.3d 447. Although the notice of appeal was filed within thirty days of the hearing on probation revocation, no final appealable judgment has been entered containing the court's ruling. An unsigned minute entry is not a final appealable judgment. See, e.g., State v. Jimenez, 938 P.2d 264, 264 (Utah 1997) (stating court has consistently dismissed appeals from unsigned minute entries); State v. Rawlings, 829 P.2d 150, 153 (Utah Ct. App. 1992) (concluding an unsigned minute entry is not a final appealable judgment). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal.
We dismiss the appeal for
lack of jurisdiction. Our dismissal is without prejudice to a timely appeal
filed after entry of a signed judgment on the probation revocation and
reinstatement; however, our dismissal is with prejudice to any appeal from
the October 29, 1999 judgment.
Norman H. Jackson,
Associate Presiding Judge
Russell W. Bench, Judge
James Z. Davis, Judge