Legal Opinion

State v. Baker

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided January 10, 2008No. 20060289-CAPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

ORME, Judge:

¶ 1 Defendant Robert Roy Baker claims that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance during the course of sentencing. Defendant, however, is precluded from raising that issue in this appeal because this court previously ruled on the matter in an earlier appeal brought by Defendant. See generally State v. Baker, 2007 UT App 35U, 2007 WL 416682 (per curiam), cert. denied, 168 P.3d 1264 (Utah 2007).

¶ 2 “[R]es. judicata ... refer[s] to the overall doctrine of the preclusive effects to be given to judgments. [It] has two branches: claim preclusion and issue…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Sealfon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  2. United States v. OppenheimerSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  3. State v. SchreuderUtah Supreme Court · 1985
  4. State v. GalliUtah Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State v. RudolphUtah Supreme Court · 1998

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. BrooksCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2012
  2. Pioneer Home v. TaxHawkCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2019
  3. State v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2011
  4. Willey v. BugdenCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API