State v. Ogden
State v. Ogden, 2023 UT 23 (Hagen, J.)
Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted aggravated sexual abuse of a child. Six years later, he filed a motion under rule 60(b)(6) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure seeking to set aside his conviction because he received ineffective assistance of counsel during his plea and sentencing proceedings. The district court denied the motion. The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding:
- The district court did not err in denying the motion when it concluded the defendant should have brought his claim as a direct appeal or under the PCRA.
- Practice tip: Rule 60(b)(6) does not apply where a defendant alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel as a basis to vacate a conviction.
- Practice tip: Two justices have suggested that a defendant could challenge the entry of a plea in abeyance under rule 60(b)(6) because a successful plea in abeyance is not a conviction that can be challenged under the PCRA.