meaningful opportunity rule (Utah) · Go Syfert
← Utah issues

meaningful opportunity rule in Utah

9 Utah opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Utah courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Merrillgreen
utah · 2005 · cited in 1 Utah opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020Under Utah law, Mitchell had two avenues for asserting claims for ineffective assistance of his district court counsel: (a) in the district court, whether at trial or in a post- trial motion; or (b) if such a claim was not “raised or addressed at trial or on appeal,” in a post-conviction proceeding under the _____________________________________________________________ 6 See Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387, 396 (1985) (“A first appeal as of right . . . is not adjudicated in accord with due process of law if the appellant does not have the effective assistance of an attorney.”); see also State v.

2020Under Utah law, Mitchell had two avenues for asserting claims for ineffective assistance of his district court counsel: (a) in the district court, whether at trial or in a post- trial motion; or (b) if such a claim was not “raised or addressed at trial or on appeal,” in a post-conviction proceeding under the _____________________________________________________________ 6 See Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387, 396 (1985) (“A first appeal as of right . . . is not adjudicated in accord with due process of law if the appellant does not have the effective assistance of an attorney.”); see also State v.

11
Evitts v. Luceygreen
scotus · 1985 · cited in 1 Utah opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020Under Utah law, Mitchell had two avenues for asserting claims for ineffective assistance of his district court counsel: (a) in the district court, whether at trial or in a post- trial motion; or (b) if such a claim was not “raised or addressed at trial or on appeal,” in a post-conviction proceeding under the _____________________________________________________________ 6 See Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387, 396 (1985) (“A first appeal as of right . . . is not adjudicated in accord with due process of law if the appellant does not have the effective assistance of an attorney.”); see also State v.

2020Under Utah law, Mitchell had two avenues for asserting claims for ineffective assistance of his district court counsel: (a) in the district court, whether at trial or in a post- trial motion; or (b) if such a claim was not “raised or addressed at trial or on appeal,” in a post-conviction proceeding under the _____________________________________________________________ 6 See Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387, 396 (1985) (“A first appeal as of right . . . is not adjudicated in accord with due process of law if the appellant does not have the effective assistance of an attorney.”); see also State v.

11
Bergmann v. Bergmanngreen
utahctapp · 2018 · cited in 1 Utah opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019See Bergmann v. Bergmann, 2018 UT App 130, ¶ 14 , (…continued) manner that the court had a meaningful opportunity to rule” on them, they are unpreserved and we decline to consider them.

11
Allen v. Frielgreen
utah · 2008 · cited in 1 Utah opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013See Allen v. Friel, 2008 UT 56 ¶ 9 , 194 P.3d 903 (explaining, in the analogous context of our rules regarding adequate briefing on appeal, that we have "repeatedly noted that a brief is inadequate if it merely contains bald citations to authority [without] development of that authority and reasoned analysis based on that authority" (alteration in original, internal quotation marks omitted); Tolman v. Winchester Hills Water Co., 912 P.2d 457, 461 (Utah Ct.App.1996) (holding that "[the mere mention of an issue without introducing supporting evidence or relevant legal authority does not preserve

2013See Allen v. Friel, 2008 UT 56 ¶ 9 , 194 P.3d 903 (explaining, in the analogous context of our rules regarding adequate briefing on appeal, that we have "repeatedly noted that a brief is inadequate if it merely contains bald citations to authority [without] development of that authority and reasoned analysis based on that authority" (alteration in original, internal quotation marks omitted); Tolman v. Winchester Hills Water Co., 912 P.2d 457, 461 (Utah Ct.App.1996) (holding that "[the mere mention of an issue without introducing supporting evidence or relevant legal authority does not preserve

11
Tolman v. Winchester Hills Water Co., Inc.green
utahctapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Utah opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013See Allen v. Friel, 2008 UT 56 ¶ 9 , 194 P.3d 903 (explaining, in the analogous context of our rules regarding adequate briefing on appeal, that we have ―repeatedly noted that a brief is inadequate if it merely contains bald citations to authority [without] development of that authority and reasoned analysis based on that authority‖ (altera- tion in original, internal quotation marks omitted)); Tolman v. Winchester Hills Water Co., 912 P.2d 457, 461 (Utah Ct. App. 1996) (holding that ―[t]he mere mention of an issue without introducing supporting evidence or relevant legal authority does not pr

2013See Allen v. Friel, 2008 UT 56 ¶ 9 , 194 P.3d 903 (explaining, in the analogous context of our rules regarding adequate briefing on appeal, that we have "repeatedly noted that a brief is inadequate if it merely contains bald citations to authority [without] development of that authority and reasoned analysis based on that authority" (alteration in original, internal quotation marks omitted); Tolman v. Winchester Hills Water Co., 912 P.2d 457, 461 (Utah Ct.App.1996) (holding that "[the mere mention of an issue without introducing supporting evidence or relevant legal authority does not preserve

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Utah. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Hill v. Superior Property Management Services, Inc. green
utah · 2013
2 sentences

2019Servs., Inc. , 2013 UT 60 , ¶ 46, 321 P.3d 1054 ("Preservation requires affording the district court a meaningful opportunity to rule on the ground that is advanced on appeal ....").

2019Servs., Inc. , 2013 UT 60 , ¶ 46, 321 P.3d 1054 ("Preservation requires affording the district court a meaningful opportunity to rule on the ground that is advanced on appeal ....").

22018–2019
State v. Low green
utah · 2008
2 sentences

2012Id. 1 45 Shaud failed to preserve a challenge to the constitutionality of the filing standard in the Adoption Act, Utah Code § 78B-6-121(4).

2012Id. ¶45 Shaud failed to preserve a challenge to the constitutionality of the filing standard in the Adoption Act, Utah Code § 78B-6-121(4).

22012–2012
Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co. green
scotus · 1982
2 sentences

2005Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 437 , 102 S.Ct. 1148 , 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). ¶ 29 Mr. Merrill contends that he did not enter a voluntary and knowing plea because he was suffering from religious delusions brought on as a side effect of his medicine, Zoloft.

2005Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 437 , 102 S.Ct. 1148 , 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). ¶ 29 Mr. Merrill contends that he did not enter a voluntary and knowing plea because he was suffering from religious delusions brought on as a side effect of his medicine, Zoloft.

12005–2005
Donovan v. Lone Steer, Inc. green
scotus · 1984
2 sentences

1988Donovan v. Lone Steer, Inc., 464 U.S. 408 , 415, 104 S.Ct. 769 , 773, 78 L.Ed.2d 567 (1984).

1988Donovan v. Lone Steer, Inc., 464 U.S. 408 , 415, 104 S.Ct. 769 , 773, 78 L.Ed.2d 567 (1984).

11988–1988

Where else courts name it

ND 42 (1980–2026) CO 15 (1993–2026) MA 13 (1973–2026) MO 12 (1985–2010) UT 9 (1988–2020) AR 7 (1972–2016) PA 7 (2007–2024) WA 7 (2006–2021) CA 5 (2009–2025) CT 4 (1978–2009) OR 4 (2019–2022) FL 4 (1998–2007) KS 4 (1997–2019) OH 3 (2008–2026) NY 3 (1990–2001) MI 3 (2022–2026) TX 2 (2012–2015) SD 2 (1994–2007) VT 2 (2019–2023) WY 2 (1988–1989) NM 2 (2013–2013) RI 2 (2012–2026) TN 2 (2012–2012)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check