State v. Harrison, 269 P.3d 133

Harrison pleaded guilty to attempted murder of J.M.S.'s unborn child after paying $150 to have the child killed by punching the mother.
The district court sua sponte questioned Harrison's eligibility for attempted murder under Shondel, and sentenced him on the lesser offense of attempted killing of an unborn child by abortion.
The district court held that the elements of attempted murder of an unborn child were duplicative of the abortion-based offense, effectively dismissing the attempted murder charge.
The State appealed the district court's Shondel ruling and sentencing, arguing the district court erred and that the State had a right to appeal.
The majority holds the State has a statutory right to appeal the Shondel ruling, reverses the district court on the merits, and remands for sentencing on the attempted murder charge; a companion case involving the juvenile mother(J.M.S.) provides related reasoning.
Dissent argues the State has no jurisdiction to appeal the district court's actions and would defer to legislative expansion of appeal rights.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State may appeal the Shondel ruling	State had a right to appeal under Gomez	State lacks jurisdiction absent enumerated statutory basis	Yes; State has right to appeal the Shondel ruling and pursue sentencing on the charged count.
Whether the district court erred in applying Shondel to bar sentencing on attempted murder	Shondel does not bar; offenses are distinct	Elements are duplicate via abortion-based framework	No; district court erred; attempted murder elements are distinct from attempted killing by abortion.
Whether sentencing on the lesser offense was proper	Sentence on lesser offense should be vacated	Lesser offense sentencing was correct under Shondel	Remanded for sentencing on attempted murder; the lesser offense sentence vacated.
Whether the legislation and double jeopardy concerns affect review	Review should reinstate guilty plea without second prosecution	Double jeopardy bars re-opening trial	Double jeopardy concerns are not triggered; reinstatement of guilty plea would remedy error.
Whether the district court's action aligns with statutory structure distinguishing homicide vs abortion-based killing	Statutes separate homicide of unborn child from abortion-based killing	Court treated all acts as abortions	Yes; actions fall under separate, mutually exclusive offenses; sentencing on attempted murder permissible.

State v. Gomez, 722 P.2d 747 (Utah 1986) (Shondel-related appealability based on effect of dismissal of charges)
State v. Davenport, 517 P.2d 544 (Utah 1978) (Earlier view on State's limited right to appeal; successor framework)
State v. Kelbach, 569 P.2d 1100 (Utah 1977) (No right to appeal unless statute expressly provides; supports restrictive view)
State v. Barrett, 127 P.3d 682 (Utah 2005) (Legislative expansion of State's direct appeal rights after district court actions)