Utah Code » Title 78B, Chapter 9 — Postconviction Remedies Act; part 78B-9-1 — General Provisions
Utah Code

Utah Code § 78B-9-102 (2026)

Replacement of prior remedies

✓ laws through the 2026 General Session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
This chapter establishes the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies, including a direct appeal except as provided in Subsection (2). This chapter replaces all prior remedies for review, including extraordinary or common law writs. Proceedings under this chapter are civil and are governed by the rules of civil procedure. Procedural provisions for filing and commencement of a petition are found in Rule 65C, Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.
A court may not enter an order to withdraw, modify, vacate or otherwise set aside a plea unless it is in conformity with this chapter or Section 77-13-6.
This chapter does not apply to:
habeas corpus petitions that do not challenge a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense;
motions to correct a sentence pursuant to Rule 22(e), Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure; or
actions taken by the Board of Pardons and Parole.

Amended by Chapter 450, 2017 General Session

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case: Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3, 435 P.3d 221.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3, 435 P.3d 221. · cites it 16× “Section 78B-9-102 provides in relevant part: This chapter establishes the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies, including a direct appeal except as provided in Subsection (2).”
Meza v. State, 2015 UT 70, 359 P.3d 592. · cites it 10× “Meza relies on sections 78B-9-102(1) and 78B-9-104(1), which reference conviction and sentence in the disjunctive.”
Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46, 234 P.3d 1115. · cites it 4× “§ 78 -35a-102 (1996) with Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-102 (2008). 242 . Id.”
State v. Hon. Boyden, 2019 UT 11, 441 P.3d 737. · cites it 3× “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-102(1)(a). In addition, the court's "authority to rescind acceptance of a guilty plea [was] specifically limited to the window before sentencing and judgment" and "that window [had] closed.”
Winward v. State, 2012 UT 85, 293 P.3d 259. · cites it 3× “" Utah Codepz § 78B-9-102(1). 1 Under the PCRA, "[a] petitioner is entitled to relief only if the petition is filed within one year after the cause of action has acerued.”
Archuleta v. State, 2020 UT 62, 472 P.3d 950. · cites it 3× “Because the PCRA provides that it is “the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies,” UTAH CODE § 78B-9-102(1)(a), the post-conviction court and both parties have assumed that the PCRA…”
Bevan v. State, 2021 UT App 107, 499 P.3d 191. · cites it 4× “3d 686 (quotation simplified); see also Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-102(1)(a) (LexisNexis 2018) (explaining that post- conviction proceedings are civil).”
Patterson v. State, 2021 UT 52, 504 P.3d 92. · cites it 2× “According to Patterson, the district court and this court possess constitutional authority to issue post-conviction extraordinary writs that is independent of a statutory scheme like the PCRA.”
Nicholls v. State, 2009 UT 12, 203 P.3d 976. · cites it 2× “Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-102(1) (2008). 5 .”
Pinder v. State, 2015 UT 56, 367 P.3d 968. · cites it 2× “Hurst established common law “exceptions” to the limitations of the PCRA, Those exceptions, in turn, were repudiated by the legislature in 2008, in a provision clarifying that the PCRA is the “sole remedy” for post-conviction relief.”
State v. Robinson, 2023 UT 25, 540 P.3d 614. · cites it 3× “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-102(1)(a), (2)(b). No language in the rule supports Robinson’s invitation to read it as vesting the courts with the authority to correct sentences on other, unidentified grounds.”
Oseguera v. State, 2014 UT 31, 332 P.3d 963. · cites it 2× “" 30 Utah Code section 78B-9-102(1) provides that the PCRA "establishes the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies," and "replaces all prior remedies for review, including…”
Show all 37 citing cases →
Utah Code § 78B-9-102(1): 17 cases
Meza v. State, 2015 UT 70, 359 P.3d 592. “Meza relies on sections 78B-9-102(1) and 78B-9-104(1), which reference conviction and sentence in the disjunctive.”
Winward v. State, 2012 UT 85, 293 P.3d 259. “" Utah Codepz § 78B-9-102(1). 1 Under the PCRA, "[a] petitioner is entitled to relief only if the petition is filed within one year after the cause of action has acerued.”
Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46, 234 P.3d 1115. “§ 78 -35a-102 (1996) with Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-102 (2008). 242 . Id.”
Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3, 435 P.3d 221. “Section 78B-9-102 provides in relevant part: This chapter establishes the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies, including a direct appeal except as provided in Subsection (2).”
Nicholls v. State, 2009 UT 12, 203 P.3d 976. “Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-102(1) (2008). 5 .”
Utah Code § 78B-9-102(1)(a): 18 cases
Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3, 435 P.3d 221. “Section 78B-9-102 provides in relevant part: This chapter establishes the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies, including a direct appeal except as provided in Subsection (2).”
State v. Hon. Boyden, 2019 UT 11, 441 P.3d 737. “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-102(1)(a). In addition, the court's "authority to rescind acceptance of a guilty plea [was] specifically limited to the window before sentencing and judgment" and "that window [had] closed.”
Bevan v. State, 2021 UT App 107, 499 P.3d 191. “3d 686 (quotation simplified); see also Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-102(1)(a) (LexisNexis 2018) (explaining that post- conviction proceedings are civil).”
Patterson v. State, 2021 UT 52, 504 P.3d 92. “According to Patterson, the district court and this court possess constitutional authority to issue post-conviction extraordinary writs that is independent of a statutory scheme like the PCRA.”
Archuleta v. State, 2020 UT 62, 472 P.3d 950. “Because the PCRA provides that it is “the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies,” UTAH CODE § 78B-9-102(1)(a), the post-conviction court and both parties have assumed that the PCRA…”
Utah Code § 78B-9-102(2): 3 cases
Archuleta v. State, 2020 UT 62, 472 P.3d 950. “Because the PCRA provides that it is “the sole remedy for any person who challenges a conviction or sentence for a criminal offense and who has exhausted all other legal remedies,” UTAH CODE § 78B-9-102(1)(a), the post-conviction court and both parties have assumed that the PCRA…”
Archuleta v. State, 2020 UT 62.
Sandoval v. State, 2019 UT 13, 441 P.3d 748.
Utah Code § 78B-9-102(l): 1 case
Pinder v. State, 2015 UT 56, 367 P.3d 968. “Hurst established common law “exceptions” to the limitations of the PCRA, Those exceptions, in turn, were repudiated by the legislature in 2008, in a provision clarifying that the PCRA is the “sole remedy” for post-conviction relief.”
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.