State of Utah v. Huynh
Annotate this CaseIN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
----ooOoo----
State of Utah,
Plaintiff and Appellee,
v.
Shelly Huynh,
Defendant and Appellant.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
Case No. 20030584-CA
F I L E D
(October 17, 2003)
2003 UT App 338
-----
Fourth District, Provo Department
The Honorable Gary D. Stott
Attorneys: Shelly Huynh, Spanish Fork, Appellant Pro Se
Mark L. Shurtleff and Brett J. DelPorto, Salt Lake City, for Appellee
-----
Before Judges Jackson, Greenwood, and Orme.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Shelly Huynh seeks to appeal her conviction, based upon a guilty plea, of attempted aggravated arson, a third degree felony. This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The district court entered its judgment and sentence on April 27, 2001. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on July 14, 2003, well beyond the thirty-day time limit under rule 4(a) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure. "If an appeal is not timely filed, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal." Serrato v. Utah Transit Auth., 2000 UT App 299,¶7, 13 P.3d 616.
Appellant does not dispute that her appeal was not timely filed, but requests that the appeal be allowed to proceed in the interest of justice. This court is precluded from extending the time for appeal. See Utah R. App. P. 2. The time to seek an extension in the trial court has expired. See Utah R. App. P. 4(e) (allowing trial court to consider a motion to extend time to appeal filed within thirty days after expiration of the original thirty-day appeal period). Once a court has concluded that it lacks jurisdiction, it "retains only the jurisdiction to dismiss the action." Varian-Eimac, Inc. v. Lamoreaux, 767 P.2d 569, 570 (Utah Ct. App. 1998).
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
______________________________
Norman H. Jackson,
Presiding Judge
______________________________
Pamela T. Greenwood, Judge
______________________________
Gregory K. Orme, 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.