Vernal City v. Critton, 14683
| Decision Date | 25 May 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 14683,14683 |
| Citation | 565 P.2d 408 |
| Parties | VERNAL CITY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jerry Dean CRITTON, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Robert M. McRae, Salt Lake City, for defendant-appellant.
Ken Anderton, Vernal City Atty., Vernal, for plaintiff-respondent.
Defendant appeals a District Court trial de novo conviction of driving under the influence, having been previously convicted of the offense in Justice Court. He asserts Section 41-6-44.2, U.C.A.1953, 1 was unconstitutionally applied and that the admission in evidence of the result of a breathalyzer test without sufficient foundation was a denial of due process.
The Utah Constitution and case law are dispositive of this appeal. The pertinent constitutional provision is Article VIII, Section 9, which reads as follows:
Appeals shall also lie from the final judgment of justices of the peace in civil and criminal cases to the District Courts on both questions of law and fact, with such limitations and restrictions as shall be provided by law; and the decision of the District Court on such appeals shall be final, except in cases involving the validity or constitutionality of a statute. (Emphasis added.)
State v. Robinson, 2 and the numerous cases cited therein, interpret the foregoing constitutional provision and hold that where one does not contend in the court below that the statute under which he was charged was invalid, the decision of the District Court is final and not reviewable on appeal.
Defendant's claim of unconstitutional application of the statute and lack of due process are clearly not challenges to the validity or constitutionality of the statute itself and hence there is no appropriate issue here for review.
Appeal dismissed.
1 Provides as unlawful the driving of a motor vehicle by one having a blood alcohol content of .10% or greater.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Taylor
...59 P. 529 (1899); Smith v. District Court, 24 Utah 164, 66 P. 1065 (1901).2 State v. Munger, Utah, 642 P.2d 721 (1982); Vernal City v. Critton, Utah, 565 P.2d 408 (1977); State v. Robinson, 23 Utah 2d 78, 457 P.2d 969 (1969); Salina City v. Freece, 61 Utah 574, 216 P. 1078 (1923); State v. ......
-
Salt Lake City v. Piepenburg
...State v. Robinson, 23 Utah 2d 78, 457 P.2d 969 (1969) and the numerous cases cited therein, followed recently by Vernal City v. Critton, Utah, 565 P.2d 408 (1977); Salt Lake City v. Perkins, 122 Utah 43, 245 P.2d 1176 (1952).8 Article VIII, Section 9 providing for appeal from justice court ......
-
City of Monticello v. Christensen, 890163
...the lower court. See, e.g., State v. Van Gervan, 657 P.2d 1377 (Utah 1983); State v. Munger, 642 P.2d 721 (Utah 1982); Vernal City v. Critton, 565 P.2d 408 (Utah 1977); State v. Lyte, 75 Utah 283, 284 P. 1006 (1930); Eureka City v. Wilson, 15 Utah 53, 48 P. 41 (1897), aff'd, 173 U.S. 32, 19......
-
State v. Pilcher
...of § 41-6-46. This Court has jurisdiction of the appeal pursuant to Art. VIII, § 9 of the Utah Constitution. 2 Vernal City v. Critton, Utah, 565 P.2d 408 (1977); Eureka City v. Wilson, 15 Utah 53, 48 P. 41 (1897), aff'd, 173 U.S. 32, 19 S.Ct. 317, 43 L.Ed. 603 Defendant raises several point......