State v. Peterson
293 P.3d 1103
Utah Ct. App.2012Background
- Peterson was sentenced on June 27, 2011 to 360 days in jail for one count of possession or use of a controlled substance (third degree felony).
- The trial court gave credit for time served and invited petition for early release upon completing a drug treatment program while incarcerated.
- Peterson was released from jail on December 24, 2011 and the case was closed on completion of sentence.
- Peterson appealed, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing without a presentence report and by relying on not reasonably reliable information.
- The State argued the appeal was moot since the sentence had been completed and no resentencing could affect Peterson’s rights.
- The appellate court treated mootness as a question and ultimately dismissed the appeal as moot, concluding the requested relief was impossible or of no legal effect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the appeal moot due to completion of sentence? | Peterson argues for review of sentencing legality. | State contends no effect from mootness since case closed. | Appeal dismissed as moot; cannot grant resentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of L.O., 282 P.3d 977 (Utah 2012) (mootness and advisory opinions considerations)
- In re C.D., 2010 UT 66 (Utah Supreme Court 2010) (mootness principles)
- Richards v. Baum, 914 P.2d 719 (Utah 1996) (standard mootness analysis)
- Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40 (U.S. 1968) (collateral consequences and mootness considerations)
- State v. Martinez, 925 P.2d 176 (Utah Ct. App. 1996) (collateral consequences not present here)
- State v. Davis, 721 P.2d 894 (Utah 1986) (mootness in criminal appeals when sentence completed)