State v. Hon. Ann Boyden, 2019 UT 11 (March 20, 2019)

The State convicted Bela Fritz of criminal drug charges and he was sentenced to prison using Bela Fritz’s criminal history.  Then, during the prison intake process, a corrections officer discovered that the man was not Bela Fritz after all.  The State moved to vacate the conviction and sentence under Rule 60(b) and the man opposed the motion.  The district court denied the motion, holding that the State’s only avenue for relief was the PCRA.  On a Rule 65B petition for extraordinary relief, the Supreme Court held that in this “somewhat unconventional” case, the district court had jurisdiction to entertain the Rule 60(b) motion “because neither the PCRA nor any other statute or rule governs this aspect of criminal proceedings.”