Utah Code

Utah Code § 78B-9-107 (2026)

Statute of limitations for postconviction relief

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A petitioner is entitled to relief only if the petition is filed within one year after the day on which the cause of action has accrued.

For purposes of this section, the cause of action accrues on the later of the following dates:

the last day for filing an appeal from the entry of the final judgment of conviction, if no appeal is taken;

the entry of the decision of the appellate court that has jurisdiction over the case, if an appeal is taken;

the last day for filing a petition for writ of certiorari in the Utah Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court, if no petition for writ of certiorari is filed;

the entry of the denial of the petition for writ of certiorari or the entry of the decision on the petition for certiorari review, if a petition for writ of certiorari is filed;

the date on which petitioner knew or should have known, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, of evidentiary facts on which the petition is based; or

the date on which the new rule described in Subsection 78B-9-104(1)(g) is established.

The limitations period is tolled for any period during which the petitioner was prevented from filing a petition due to state action in violation of the United States Constitution, due to physical or mental incapacity, or for claims arising under Subsection 78B-9-104(1)(h), due to force, fraud, or coercion as defined in Section 76-5-308.

The petitioner has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the petitioner is entitled to relief under this Subsection (3).

The statute of limitations is tolled during the pendency of the outcome of a petition asserting:

exoneration through DNA testing under Section 78B-9-303; or

factual innocence under Section 78B-9-402.

Sections 77-19-8, 78B-2-104, and 78B-2-111 do not extend the limitations period established in this section.

This section does not apply to a petition filed under Part 3, Postconviction Testing of DNA, or Part 4, Postconviction Determination of Factual Innocence.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 65 cases (22 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). · cites it 17× “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3 (Utah 2019). · cites it 15× “UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107. And rule 15(c) must be interpreted in a manner that preserves some application of that statute of limitations.”

Patterson v. State, 2021 UT 52 (Utah 2021). · cites it 10× “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107. The State also argued that because the PCRA wholly regulates this court‘s authority to issue extraordinary writs that challenge a conviction, the PCRA‘s time-bar foreclosed any other avenue Patterson claimed the court could utilize to give him the…”

Winward v. State, 293 P.3d 259 (Utah 2012). · cites it 8× “See Urax Cope § 78B-9-107. With one possible exception, Mr.”

Brown v. State, 2015 UT App 254 (Utah Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 16× “§ 78B-9-107(@2)(a), (e). The PCRA also provides that [the limitations period is tolled for any period during which the petitioner was prevented from filing a petition due to state action in violation of the United States Constitution, or due to physical or mental incapacity.”

Thomas v. Hillyard, 2019 UT 29 (Utah 2019). · cites it 4× “Utah Code § 78B-9-107. And while many jurisdictions follow some variation of either the one- or two-track approach as articulated by the parties, our approach is not novel.”

Archuleta v. State, 2020 UT 62 (Utah 2020). · cites it 3× “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107(1) (“A petitioner is entitled to relief only if the petition is filed within one year after the cause of action has accrued.”

Tillman v. State, 2012 UT App 289 (Utah Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 7× “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-107@)(e) (2008). Tillman was re-sentenced in 2005 and knew at that time that his counsel did not demand a new trial based on the transcripts or the amended information.”

McNair v. State, 328 P.3d 874 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “Apparently unaware of the PCRA or the statute of limitations contained in Utah Code section 78B-9-107, MeNair decided he would present the letter to the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole at his next parole hearing.”

Bevan v. State, 2021 UT App 107 (Utah Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 4× “The district court dismissed the 2010 Petition as time- barred, see Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-107(1)–(2) (LexisNexis 2018) (requiring petitions for post-conviction relief to be “filed within one year after the cause of action has accrued” and listing accrual-triggering events), and…”

Marchet v. State, 327 P.3d 44 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 9× “The State, in turn, filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the petition was time barred under section 78B-9-107. Marchet acknowledged that the petition was not filed within one year of the date he could have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States…”

Collum v. State, 2015 UT App 229 (Utah Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 12× “After consideration of the pleadings, the trial court dismissed Collum's petition as untimely under section 78B-9-107. Collum appeals. T3 Collum acknowledges that his petition was untimely filed but asserts that his petition should be heard on the merits for various reasons.”

Show all 65 citing cases →

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(1) — 43 cases

Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3 (Utah 2019). “UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107. And rule 15(c) must be interpreted in a manner that preserves some application of that statute of limitations.”

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Archuleta v. State, 2020 UT 62 (Utah 2020). “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107(1) (“A petitioner is entitled to relief only if the petition is filed within one year after the cause of action has accrued.”

Winward v. State, 293 P.3d 259 (Utah 2012). “See Urax Cope § 78B-9-107. With one possible exception, Mr.”

Bevan v. State, 2021 UT App 107 (Utah Ct. App. 2021). “The district court dismissed the 2010 Petition as time- barred, see Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-107(1)–(2) (LexisNexis 2018) (requiring petitions for post-conviction relief to be “filed within one year after the cause of action has accrued” and listing accrual-triggering events), and…”

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2) — 12 cases

Winward v. State, 293 P.3d 259 (Utah 2012). “See Urax Cope § 78B-9-107. With one possible exception, Mr.”

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Brown v. State, 2015 UT App 254 (Utah Ct. App. 2015). “§ 78B-9-107(@2)(a), (e). The PCRA also provides that [the limitations period is tolled for any period during which the petitioner was prevented from filing a petition due to state action in violation of the United States Constitution, or due to physical or mental incapacity.”

Marchet v. State, 327 P.3d 44 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “The State, in turn, filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the petition was time barred under section 78B-9-107. Marchet acknowledged that the petition was not filed within one year of the date he could have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States…”

Neese v. State, 2017 UT App 164 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2)(a) — 7 cases

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Jackson v. Spanish Fork, 2025 UT App 161 (Utah Ct. App. 2025).

Leger v. State, 2017 UT App 217 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

Lopez v. Ogden City, 2017 UT App 122 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

Avila v. Taylorsville City, 2018 UT App 11 (Utah Ct. App. 2018).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2)(b) — 2 cases

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Jackson v. Spanish Fork, 2025 UT App 161 (Utah Ct. App. 2025).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2)(c) — 6 cases

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Patterson v. State, 2021 UT 52 (Utah 2021). “See UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107. The State also argued that because the PCRA wholly regulates this court‘s authority to issue extraordinary writs that challenge a conviction, the PCRA‘s time-bar foreclosed any other avenue Patterson claimed the court could utilize to give him the…”

Tillman v. State, 2012 UT App 289 (Utah Ct. App. 2012). “See Utah Code Ann. § 78B-9-107@)(e) (2008). Tillman was re-sentenced in 2005 and knew at that time that his counsel did not demand a new trial based on the transcripts or the amended information.”

Marchet v. State, 2016 UT App 28 (Utah Ct. App. 2016).

Jackson v. Spanish Fork, 2025 UT App 161 (Utah Ct. App. 2025).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2)(d) — 4 cases

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Winward v. State, 293 P.3d 259 (Utah 2012). “See Urax Cope § 78B-9-107. With one possible exception, Mr.”

Weikert v. State, 2012 UT App 103 (Utah Ct. App. 2012).

Williams v. State, 2015 UT App 271 (Utah Ct. App. 2015).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2)(e) — 15 cases

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Carter v. State, 2019 UT 12 (Utah 2019).

State v. Brown, 2021 UT 11 (Utah 2021).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(2)(f) — 1 case

Collum v. State, 2015 UT App 229 (Utah Ct. App. 2015). “After consideration of the pleadings, the trial court dismissed Collum's petition as untimely under section 78B-9-107. Collum appeals. T3 Collum acknowledges that his petition was untimely filed but asserts that his petition should be heard on the merits for various reasons.”

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(3) — 10 cases

Winward v. State, 293 P.3d 259 (Utah 2012). “See Urax Cope § 78B-9-107. With one possible exception, Mr.”

Noor v. State, 2019 UT 3 (Utah 2019). “UTAH CODE § 78B-9-107. And rule 15(c) must be interpreted in a manner that preserves some application of that statute of limitations.”

Gardner v. State, 2010 UT 46 (Utah 2010). “§ 78B-9-107(1). 187. 188 . § 78B-9-107(2).”

Thomas v. Hillyard, 2019 UT 29 (Utah 2019). “Utah Code § 78B-9-107. And while many jurisdictions follow some variation of either the one- or two-track approach as articulated by the parties, our approach is not novel.”

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(3)(a) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(4) — 1 case

Branch v. State, 2015 UT App 204 (Utah Ct. App. 2015).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(4)(a) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(8) — 5 cases

McNair v. State, 328 P.3d 874 (Utah Ct. App. 2014). “Apparently unaware of the PCRA or the statute of limitations contained in Utah Code section 78B-9-107, MeNair decided he would present the letter to the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole at his next parole hearing.”

Weikert v. State, 2012 UT App 103 (Utah Ct. App. 2012).

Cunningham v. State, 2012 UT App 358 (Utah Ct. App. 2012).

Wamsley v. State, 2012 UT App 57 (Utah Ct. App. 2012).

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(G) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 78B-9-107(l) — 6 cases

State v. Wynn, 2017 UT App 211 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

Neese v. State, 2017 UT App 164 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

Glasscock v. State, 2017 UT App 39 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

Cramer v. State, 2016 UT App 175 (Utah Ct. App. 2016).

Lopez v. Ogden City, 2017 UT App 122 (Utah Ct. App. 2017).

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.