State v. Coleman
302 P.3d 860
Utah Ct. App.
2013
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1 Before J UDGES O RME R OTH C HRISTIANSEN

PER CURIAM:

¶1 David C. appeals trial court’s denial rule 4(f) Rules Appellate Procedure. This court on its own for summary disposition based on lack substantial question for review. The trial denied untimely. We affirm other grounds. An appellate may affirm judgment appealed any legal ground apparent record it raised or considered court. Rynhart

State v. ¶2 Coleman pleaded guilty to two charges was sentenced in March 2007. In August 2012, he filed a to time to file a direct appeal to rule 4(f). Under rule 4(f), a defendant must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was deprived of the right to appeal. Utah App. P. 4(f). “A defendant is entitled to reinstatement of his direct appeal right if he ‘has been prevented in some meaningful way from proceeding with a first appeal of right.’” State v. Kabor , 2013 UT App 12, ¶ 11, 295 P.3d 193 (quoting Manning v. State 2005 UT 61, ¶ 26, 122 P.3d 628). “A defendant has not been meaningfully deprived of his appeal right, however, if he voluntarily waived that right.” Id.

¶3 By pleading guilty, a defendant “deemed to have admitted all of the essential elements of the crime charged and thereby waives all non ‐ jurisdictional defects, including alleged pre ‐ plea constitutional violations.” State v. Rhinehart 2007 UT 167 P.3d 1046. a guilty plea operates a waiver of right to a direct appeal of the conviction the crime charged. If a defendant wishes to challenge a guilty plea direct appeal, he must first move to withdraw plea sentence is announced. [2] See Code Ann. § 77 ‐ 13 ‐ 6(2)(b) (LexisNexis 2012). Absent a to withdraw a guilty this does not have jurisdiction to review validity of plea direct Merrill ¶¶ 13–20, Coleman not move to his guilty pleas prior to sentencing. As a result, have over an appeal his convictions time file direct appeal had been reinstated.

¶4 In sum, Coleman waived his right appeal convictions, he meaningfully deprived right Documents filed support show that sought reinstatement so that he could challenge pleas. Additionally, there lack reach challenge. err in

denying appeal. ¶5 Affirmed.

Read the detailed case summary