Utah Code

Utah Code § 76-3-405 (2026)

Limitation on sentence where conviction or prior sentence set aside

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Where a conviction or sentence has been set aside on direct review or on collateral attack, the court shall not impose a new sentence for the same offense or for a different offense based on the same conduct which is more severe than the prior sentence less the portion of the prior sentence previously satisfied.

This section does not apply when:

the increased sentence is based on facts which were not known to the court at the time of the original sentence, and the court affirmatively places on the record the facts which provide the basis for the increased sentence; or

a defendant enters into a plea agreement with the prosecution and later successfully moves to invalidate the defendant's conviction, in which case the defendant and the prosecution stand in the same position as though the plea bargain, conviction, and sentence had never occurred.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 24 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2021 · leading case: Vorher v. Honorable S. L. Henriod, 2013 UT 10 (Utah 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Vorher v. Honorable S. L. Henriod, 2013 UT 10 (Utah 2013). · cites it 64× “2 Cite as: 2013 UT 10 Opinion of the Court STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶6 “Whether section 76-3-405 applies . . . is a matter of statutory interpretation, which presents a question of law.”

State v. Maguire, 957 P.2d 598 (Utah 1998). · cites it 85× “We then granted the State's petition for a writ of certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision that Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (1995) precluded the district court from imposing a more severe sentence on Maguire after he was reconvicted following the withdrawal of his no…”

State v. Powell, 957 P.2d 595 (Utah 1998). · cites it 86× “He contends that the trial court's refusal violates Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (1995), which prohibits the imposition of a more severe sentence following the setting aside of a conviction or sentence on appeal.”

State v. Samora, 2002 UT App 384 (Utah Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 46× “He contends that due process and Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (1999), preclude the imposition of a harsher sentence after a case is reversed on appeal.”

State v. PRION, 2012 UT 15 (Utah 2012). · cites it 9× “" That may be, but section 76-3-405 is inapplicable here for two reasons.”

State v. Mitchell, 824 P.2d 469 (Utah Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 18× “Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence on three grounds: (1) that notice of the firearm enhancement penalty was insufficient; (2) that the trial court violated Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (1990) in sentencing defendant to the maximum statutory punishment for manslaughter;…”

State v. Carter, 888 P.2d 629 (Utah 1995). · cites it 6× “[42] Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 provides: Where a conviction or a sentence has been set aside on direct review or on collateral attack, the court shall not impose a new sentence for the same offense or for a different offense based on the same conduct which is more severe than…”

State v. Maguire, 924 P.2d 904 (Utah Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 20× “Defendant argued that under Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (1995), Judge Rokich could not impose a sentence that was more severe than the sentence previously imposed by Judge Sawaya.”

State v. Babbel, 813 P.2d 86 (Utah 1991). · cites it 8× “§ 76-3-405 Babbel argues that Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (1978) is a limitation on the trial court’s authority under § 77-35-22(e) to correct an illegal sentence at any time.”

Dunn v. Cook, 791 P.2d 873 (Utah 1990). · cites it 8× “[1] He was represented at trial by a court-appointed attorney. After the conviction, the attorney wrote to Dunn and advised against an appeal based on the attorney's belief that if the appeal were successful, Dunn could be resentenced to death at a retrial.”

State v. Samora, 99 P.3d 858 (Utah 2004). · cites it 10× “Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-405 (2008) 2 Like the due process protections described in Pearce, this statutory provision "prevents the Utah constitutional right to appeal [as contained in article VIII, section 9] from being impaired by imposing on a defendant who demonstrates the error…”

State v. Maguire, 1999 UT App 45 (Utah Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 14× “The court then sentenced Maguire to a term not to exceed five years and expressly stated that this term *478 was to run consecutively to the term he was already serving for his prior murder conviction. ¶ 4 Approximately two years after the trial court sentenced Maguire at his…”

Show all 24 citing cases →

— Utah Code § 76-3-405(1) — 6 cases

Vorher v. Honorable S. L. Henriod, 2013 UT 10 (Utah 2013). “2 Cite as: 2013 UT 10 Opinion of the Court STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶6 “Whether section 76-3-405 applies . . . is a matter of statutory interpretation, which presents a question of law.”

Kamoe v. Hon. Ridge, 2021 UT 5 (Utah 2021).

State v. PRION, 2012 UT 15 (Utah 2012). “" That may be, but section 76-3-405 is inapplicable here for two reasons.”

Taylorsville City v. Adkins, 2006 UT App 374 (Utah Ct. App. 2006).

Vorher v. Henriod, 2011 UT App 199 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).

— Utah Code § 76-3-405(2) — 2 cases

Vorher v. Honorable S. L. Henriod, 2013 UT 10 (Utah 2013).

— Utah Code § 76-3-405(2)(a) — 1 case

State v. PRION, 2012 UT 15 (Utah 2012). “" That may be, but section 76-3-405 is inapplicable here for two reasons.”

— Utah Code § 76-3-405(2)(b) — 4 cases

Kamoe v. Hon. Ridge, 2021 UT 5 (Utah 2021).

Vorher v. Honorable S. L. Henriod, 2013 UT 10 (Utah 2013).

Vorher v. Henriod, 2011 UT App 199 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).

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.