Utah Code » Title 77, Chapter 18a — The Appeal
Utah Code

Utah Code § 77-18a-1 (2026)

Appeals -- When proper

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A defendant may, as a matter of right, appeal from:
a final judgment of conviction, whether by verdict or plea;
an order made after judgment that affects the substantial rights of the defendant;
an order adjudicating the defendant's competency to proceed further in a pending prosecution; or
an order denying bail under Chapter 20, Bail.
In addition to any appeal permitted by Subsection (1), a defendant may seek discretionary appellate review of any interlocutory order.
The prosecution may, as a matter of right, appeal from:
a final judgment of dismissal, including a dismissal of a felony information following a refusal to bind the defendant over for trial;
a pretrial order dismissing a charge on the ground that the court's suppression of evidence has substantially impaired the prosecution's case;
an order granting a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty or no contest;
an order arresting judgment or granting a motion for merger;
an order terminating the prosecution because of a finding of double jeopardy or denial of a speedy trial;
an order granting a new trial;
an order holding a statute or any part of it invalid;
an order adjudicating the defendant's competency to proceed further in a pending prosecution;
an order finding, in accordance with Chapter 19, Part 2, Competency for Execution, that an inmate sentenced to death is incompetent to be executed;
an order holding that a defendant is exempt from a sentence of death under Section 77-15a-104;
an order reducing the degree of offense pursuant to Section 76-3-402;
an illegal sentence; or
an order dismissing a charge pursuant to Subsection 76-2-309(3).
In addition to any appeal permitted by Subsection (3), the prosecution may seek discretionary appellate review of any interlocutory order entered before jeopardy attaches.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: State v. Harris, 2004 UT 103 (Utah 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Harris, 2004 UT 103 (Utah 2004). · cites it 30× “Harris's implication that the denial of a motion to dismiss can properly constitute a final order for purposes of Ambrose and an interlocutory order for purposes of section 77-18a-1. An order is either final or interlocutory — it cannot be both.”
State v. Hon. Boyden, 2019 UT 11 (Utah 2019). · cites it 4× “5 None of the parties to this proceeding challenge the State's use of Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 65B to seek extraordinary relief.”
State v. Gailey, 2016 UT 35 (Utah 2016). · cites it 4× “” ¶10 The Plea Withdrawal Statute further limits a defendant’s right to appeal by requiring the defendant to either withdraw the plea prior to sentencing, or pursue postconviction relief after sentencing.”
State v. Jaeger, 886 P.2d 53 (Utah 1994). · cites it 10× “In such cases, the dismissal of charges, when coupled with the State's inability to refile under Brickey , clearly constitutes "a final judgment of dismissal," as contemplated by section 77-18a-1(2)(a), which the State is entitled to appeal.”
State v. Barrett, 2005 UT 88 (Utah 2005). · cites it 2× “Section 77-18a-1 was amended after the State filed the present petitions for extraordinary relief.”
State v. Black, 2015 UT App 30 (Utah Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “Utah Code section 77-18a-1 allows the State to appeal from an arrest of judgment, see Utah Code Ann.”
State v. Groce, 2024 UT App 166 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “” Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1)(d). This rule makes intuitive sense: a defendant forced to wait until after the entire criminal case has resolved before being able to appeal a pretrial detention order would—as a practical matter—lose the right to appeal that order, because any…”
State v. Camara, 2023 UT App 106 (Utah Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(d) 20210668-CA 5 2023 UT App 106 State v.”
Ross v. Kracht, 2025 UT 22 (Utah 2025). · cites it 2× “In the context of the final judgment rule, “[f]or an order or judgment to be final, it must dispose of the case as to all the parties, and finally dispose of the subject-matter of the litigation on the merits of the __________________________________________________________ 28…”
State v. White, 2011 UT App 155 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “1 10 Section 77-18a-1(8) lists several types of judgments and orders that the State "may, as a matter of right, appeal from," including "a final judgment of dismissal" and "an order adjudicating the defendant's competency to proceed further in a pending prosecution.”
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 2024 UT App 165 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “§ 77-18a-1(1) (stating that “[a] defendant may, as a matter of right, appeal from” the enumerated orders); id.”
State v. Harrison, 269 P.3d 133 (Utah 2011). “§ 77-18a-1(3)(a) (2008). See 1980 Utah Laws 106 .”
Show all 24 citing cases →
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1) — 3 cases
State v. Harris, 2004 UT 103 (Utah 2004). “Harris's implication that the denial of a motion to dismiss can properly constitute a final order for purposes of Ambrose and an interlocutory order for purposes of section 77-18a-1. An order is either final or interlocutory — it cannot be both.”
State v. Chadwick, 2023 UT 12 (Utah 2023).
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 2024 UT App 165 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). “§ 77-18a-1(1) (stating that “[a] defendant may, as a matter of right, appeal from” the enumerated orders); id.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Gailey, 2016 UT 35 (Utah 2016). “” ¶10 The Plea Withdrawal Statute further limits a defendant’s right to appeal by requiring the defendant to either withdraw the plea prior to sentencing, or pursue postconviction relief after sentencing.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Menzies, 2025 UT 38 (Utah 2025).
State of Utah v. Ralph Leroy Menzies, 2025 UT 52 (Utah 2025).
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1)(c) — 2 cases
State v. Harris, 2004 UT 103 (Utah 2004). “Harris's implication that the denial of a motion to dismiss can properly constitute a final order for purposes of Ambrose and an interlocutory order for purposes of section 77-18a-1. An order is either final or interlocutory — it cannot be both.”
State v. Parry, 2018 UT App 20 (Utah Ct. App. 2018).
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1)(d) — 5 cases
State v. Groce, 2024 UT App 166 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). “” Utah Code § 77-18a-1(1)(d). This rule makes intuitive sense: a defendant forced to wait until after the entire criminal case has resolved before being able to appeal a pretrial detention order would—as a practical matter—lose the right to appeal that order, because any…”
Ross v. Kracht, 2025 UT 22 (Utah 2025). “In the context of the final judgment rule, “[f]or an order or judgment to be final, it must dispose of the case as to all the parties, and finally dispose of the subject-matter of the litigation on the merits of the __________________________________________________________ 28…”
State v. Harris, 2025 UT 48 (Utah 2025).
State v. Herman, 2026 UT App 46 (Utah Ct. App. 2026).
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 2024 UT App 165 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). “§ 77-18a-1(1) (stating that “[a] defendant may, as a matter of right, appeal from” the enumerated orders); id.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(2) — 2 cases
State v. Harris, 2025 UT 48 (Utah 2025).
Medina v. Allen (D. Utah 2023).
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Jaeger, 886 P.2d 53 (Utah 1994). “In such cases, the dismissal of charges, when coupled with the State's inability to refile under Brickey , clearly constitutes "a final judgment of dismissal," as contemplated by section 77-18a-1(2)(a), which the State is entitled to appeal.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3) — 1 case
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 2024 UT App 165 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). “§ 77-18a-1(1) (stating that “[a] defendant may, as a matter of right, appeal from” the enumerated orders); id.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(a) — 1 case
State v. Harrison, 269 P.3d 133 (Utah 2011). “§ 77-18a-1(3)(a) (2008). See 1980 Utah Laws 106 .”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(d) — 1 case
State v. Camara, 2023 UT App 106 (Utah Ct. App. 2023). “Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(d) 20210668-CA 5 2023 UT App 106 State v.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(f) — 3 cases
Ross v. Kracht, 2025 UT 22 (Utah 2025). “In the context of the final judgment rule, “[f]or an order or judgment to be final, it must dispose of the case as to all the parties, and finally dispose of the subject-matter of the litigation on the merits of the __________________________________________________________ 28…”
In re Adoption of K.R.S., 2024 UT App 165 (Utah Ct. App. 2024). “§ 77-18a-1(1) (stating that “[a] defendant may, as a matter of right, appeal from” the enumerated orders); id.”
Provo City v. Gedo, 2024 UT App 116 (Utah Ct. App. 2024).
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Menzies, 2025 UT 38 (Utah 2025).
State of Utah v. Ralph Leroy Menzies, 2025 UT 52 (Utah 2025).
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(3)(k) — 1 case
State v. Hon. Boyden, 2019 UT 11 (Utah 2019). “5 None of the parties to this proceeding challenge the State's use of Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 65B to seek extraordinary relief.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(4) — 1 case
State v. Hon. Boyden, 2019 UT 11 (Utah 2019). “5 None of the parties to this proceeding challenge the State's use of Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 65B to seek extraordinary relief.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(8) — 1 case
State v. White, 2011 UT App 155 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). “1 10 Section 77-18a-1(8) lists several types of judgments and orders that the State "may, as a matter of right, appeal from," including "a final judgment of dismissal" and "an order adjudicating the defendant's competency to proceed further in a pending prosecution.”
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(8)(a) — 1 case
State v. Houston, 2011 UT App 350 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).
— Utah Code § 77-18a-1(d) — 1 case
State v. Harris, 2025 UT 48 (Utah 2025).
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.