Utah Code » Title 68, Chapter 3 — Construction
Utah Code

Utah Code § 68-3-5 (2026)

Effect of repeal

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The repeal of a statute does not revive a statute previously repealed, or affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, or any action or proceeding commenced under or by virtue of the statute repealed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: State v. Cooke, 2025 UT 6 (Utah 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Cooke, 2025 UT 6 (Utah 2025). · cites it 15× “The court concluded that Utah’s general saving statute, Utah Code section 68-3-5, protects from abatement criminal prosecutions initiated before a statute’s repeal.”
Bourgeous v. State, Dep't of Com., 2002 UT App 5 (Utah Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 12× “Section 68-3-5 states: "The repeal of a statute does not revive a statute previously repealed, or affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, or any action or proceeding commenced under or by virtue of the statute repealed.”
Smith v. Cook, 803 P.2d 788 (Utah 1990). · cites it 4× “” 21 This approach is based on Utah Code Ann. § 68-3-5 (Supp.1984), which states, “[The] *793 repeal of a statute does not revive a statute previously repealed, or affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, or any action or proceeding commenced…”
United States v. United States Coin & Currency, 401 U.S. 715 (1971). · cites it 2× “§ 1-301 (1955); Utah: Utah Code Ann. § 68-3-5 (1968); Vermont: Vt.”
State v. Tapp, 490 P.2d 334 (Utah 1971). · cites it 4× “[6] We have reached our conclusion herein in awareness of Section 68-3-5, U.C.A. 1953: The repeal of a statute does not * * * affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, or any action or proceeding commenced under or by virtue of the statute…”
Belt v. Turner, 479 P.2d 791 (Utah 1971). · cites it 4× “The Attorney General calls our attention to the provision of Section 68-3-5, U.C.A. 1953, which provides as follows: The repeal of a statute does not revive a statute previously repealed, or affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, or any…”
State v. Miller, 464 P.2d 844 (Utah 1970). · cites it 4× “In the instant action Section 68-3-5, U.C.A., 1953, is controlling; it provides : The repeal of a statute does not revive a statute previously repealed, or affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, or any action or proceeding commenced under or…”
Holiday v. United States, 683 A.2d 61 (D.C. 1996). “2d at 336 (quoting Utah Code Ann. § 68-3-5 ) (ellipses in original).”
Brunet v. Murphy, 135 P.3d 714 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). “§ 1-3-101 (2005); Utah Code Ann. § 68-3-5 (2005); Wis. Stat.”
City Elec. v. Indus. Indem. Co., 683 P.2d 1053 (Utah 1984). · cites it 2× “, 1953, § 68-3-5; Buttrey v. Guaranteed Securities Co.”
Fussell v. Dep't of Com., Div. of Occupational & Prof'l Licensing, 815 P.2d 250 (Utah Ct. App. 1991). “§ 68-3-3 (1986) (new statutes are not retroactive unless expressly so declared); § 68-3-5 (1986) (repeal of statute does not affect rights accrued under the statute).”
State v. Featherston, 2026 UT 13 (Utah 2026). · cites it 2× “” UTAH CODE § 68-3-5. The general effect of this provision is to “save” or preserve penalties that have already been “incurred” when the underlying law is later repealed or amended.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.