section 77-13-6(2) jurisdictional nature in Utah

2010These filing limitations are jurisdictional.") "Section 77-13-6(2)(b) `imposes a jurisdictional bar on late-filed motions to withdraw guilty pleas,' and failure to comply with its requirements `extinguishes a defendant's right to challenge the validity of the guilty plea on appeal.'" Grimmett, 2007 UT 11, ¶ 8 , 152 P.3d 306 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, ¶¶ 13-20 , 114 P.3d 585 (addressing jurisdictional nature of section 77-13-6(2)(b) prior to significant 2003 amendment).

2010These filing limitations are jurisdictional.") "Section 77-13-6(2)(b) `imposes a jurisdictional bar on late-filed motions to withdraw guilty pleas,' and failure to comply with its requirements `extinguishes a defendant's right to challenge the validity of the guilty plea on appeal.'" Grimmett, 2007 UT 11, ¶ 8 , 152 P.3d 306 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, ¶¶ 13-20 , 114 P.3d 585 (addressing jurisdictional nature of section 77-13-6(2)(b) prior to significant 2003 amendment).

2013"Constitutional challenges to statutes present questions of law, which we review for correctness." State v. Turner, 2012 UT App 189, ¶ 14 , 283 P.3d 527 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 18 Specifically, Stone argues that the jurisdictional bar in section 77-13-6 is unconstitutional because it requires him to attack the validity of his pleas pursuant to rule 65C of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and the Post-Conviection Remedies Act (PCRA), see Utah Code Ann. §§ 78B-9-101 to -405 (LexisNexis 2012), which are inadequate because they do not guarantee him a right to competent le

2013"Constitutional challenges to statutes present questions of law, which we review for correctness." State v. Turner, 2012 UT App 189, ¶ 14 , 283 P.3d 527 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 18 Specifically, Stone argues that the jurisdictional bar in section 77-13-6 is unconstitutional because it requires him to attack the validity of his pleas pursuant to rule 65C of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and the Post-Conviection Remedies Act (PCRA), see Utah Code Ann. §§ 78B-9-101 to -405 (LexisNexis 2012), which are inadequate because they do not guarantee him a right to competent le

2013See Rhinehart, 2007 UT 61, ¶¶ 14, 22 , 167 P.3d 1046 (holding that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim cannot successfully evade the well-established jurisdictional bar of section 77-13-6); see also Ott, 2010 UT 1, ¶ 18 , 247 P.3d 344 ; State v. Mullins, 2005 UT 43 , ¶ 11 n. 2, 116 P.3d 374 ; State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, ¶ 19 , 114 P.3d 585 ; State v. Lee, 2011 UT App 356, ¶ 2 , 264 P.3d 239 (mem.). 7 Stone also argues that the jurisdictional bar set forth in Utah Code section 77-13-6 unconstitutionally violates his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.

2013See Rhinehart, 2007 UT 61, ¶¶ 14, 22 , 167 P.3d 1046 (holding that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim cannot successfully evade the well-established jurisdictional bar of section 77-13-6); see also Ott, 2010 UT 1, ¶ 18 , 247 P.3d 344 ; State v. Mullins, 2005 UT 43 , ¶ 11 n. 2, 116 P.3d 374 ; State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, ¶ 19 , 114 P.3d 585 ; State v. Lee, 2011 UT App 356, ¶ 2 , 264 P.3d 239 (mem.). 7 Stone also argues that the jurisdictional bar set forth in Utah Code section 77-13-6 unconstitutionally violates his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.

2013See Rhinehart, 2007 UT 61, ¶¶ 14, 22 , 167 P.3d 1046 (holding that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim cannot successfully evade the well-established jurisdictional bar of section 77-13-6); see also Ott, 2010 UT 1, ¶ 18 , 247 P.3d 344 ; State v. Mullins, 2005 UT 43 , ¶ 11 n. 2, 116 P.3d 374 ; State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, ¶ 19 , 114 P.3d 585 ; State v. Lee, 2011 UT App 356, ¶ 2 , 264 P.3d 239 (mem.). 7 Stone also argues that the jurisdictional bar set forth in Utah Code section 77-13-6 unconstitutionally violates his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.

2013See Rhinehart, 2007 UT 61, ¶¶ 14, 22 , 167 P.3d 1046 (holding that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim cannot successfully evade the well-established jurisdictional bar of section 77-13-6); see also Ott, 2010 UT 1, ¶ 18 , 247 P.3d 344 ; State v. Mullins, 2005 UT 43 , ¶ 11 n. 2, 116 P.3d 374 ; State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, ¶ 19 , 114 P.3d 585 ; State v. Lee, 2011 UT App 356, ¶ 2 , 264 P.3d 239 (mem.). 7 Stone also argues that the jurisdictional bar set forth in Utah Code section 77-13-6 unconstitutionally violates his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.

2011Lee's failure to petition to withdraw his guilty plea before his sentence was announced strips this court of jurisdiction to review the validity of the plea, see State v. Ott, 2010 UT 1, 18 , 247 P.3d 344 ("[F lailure to withdraw a guilty plea within the time frame dictated by section 77-13-6 deprives the trial court and appellate courts of jurisdiction to review the validity of the plea."), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 181 S.Ct. 1472 , 179 L.Ed.2d 360 (2011); see also State v. *241 Merrill, 2005 UT 34, 13-20 , 114 P.3d 585 (clarifying the jurisdictional nature of Utah Code section 77-13-6).

2007Rep. 3 , 152 P.3d 306 ("Section 77-13-6(2)(b) imposes a jurisdictional bar on late-filed motions to withdraw guilty pleas -.." (quotations and citation omitted)); State v. Merrill, 2005 UT 34, 120 , 114 P.3d 585 (stating that "section 77-13-6(@2)(b) is indeed jurisdictional"); State v. Reyes, 2002 UT 183 , 1 8, 40 P.3d 630 (refusing to consider, for lack of jurisdiction, the defendant's attacks on his guilty plea because he failed to comply with section 77-13-6(2)); see also Manning v. State, 2005 UT 61 , 1 36, 122 P.3d 628 ("Any challenge to ... a plea agreement, or to waivers contained there

2005Utah Code Ann. § 77-13-6 (1999) (amended 2003 & 2004). 1 ¶ 14 Although we have not unequivocally stated that the thirty-day filing requirement of section 77-13-6(2)(b) imposes a jurisdictional bar to late-filed requests to withdraw pleas, we have strongly implied as much. ¶ 15 We first addressed this issue in State v. Abeyta, 852 P.2d 993 (Utah 1993) (per curiam).