The moving party sought review of a single judge's order dismissing a motion for an extension of time to appeal a 2017 conviction and sentence.
The court held that criminal appeal rights are purely statutory and that no provision of the Criminal Code authorizes review or appeal from a single judge's decision under s. 678(2).
Assuming without deciding that a panel might exercise concurrent jurisdiction afresh upon a material change in circumstances, the court found no such change on the record.
The court also stated that, in any event, the motion judge applied the correct legal analysis and made factual findings entitled to deference.
