Murray City v. LoweAnnotate this Case
Plaintiff and Appellee,
Daniel R. Lowe,
Defendant and Appellant.
(Not For Official Publication)
Case No. 20010210-CA
F I L E D
July 27, 2001 2001 UT App 233 -----
Third District, Murray Department
The Honorable Michael K. Burton
Daniel R. Lowe, Sandy, Appellant Pro Se
Brian E. Bower, Murray, for Appellee
Before Judges Jackson, Davis, and Thorne.
Daniel R. Lowe was convicted in justice court of failing to remove the prior owner's license plates and driving without a valid driver's license. He appealed to the district court and was convicted of the same offenses. Lowe appeals.
According to Utah Code Ann. § 78-5-120 (Supp. 2000), Any person not satisfied with a judgment rendered in a justice court, whether rendered by default or after trial, is entitled to a trial de novo in the district court of the county as provided by law. The judgment after trial de novo may not be appealed unless the court rules on the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance. (Emphasis added); see also Kanab City v. Guskey, 965 P.2d 1065, 1068-69 (Utah Ct. App. 1998) (concluding that since defendant had appealed from justice court to district court and had not raised a constitutional issue, his right of appeal was exhausted and court of appeals did not have jurisdiction to consider matter); Monticello City v. Christensen, 769 P.2d 853, 854-55 (Utah Ct. App. 1989) (concluding that one cannot appeal district court's review of justice court's judgment unless constitutionality of ordinance or statute was at issue).
Because Lowe appealed the
justice court decision to the district court, where he received a trial
de novo, and the district court did not rule on the constitutionality of
a statute or ordinance, he has exhausted his right of appeal. See
Utah Code Ann. § 78-5-120. Accordingly, we have no alternative but
to dismiss Lowe's appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Norman H. Jackson,
Associate Presiding Judge
James Z. Davis, Judge
William A. Thorne, Jr., Judge