not enough. Utah Code Ann. § 77-29-1 (1999) {emphasis added) . 114 Moreover, a premature request for disposition does not later "kick in" once the information is ultimately filed or the indictment returned. A premature request is simply a nullity, having no legal effect. CJ. State v. Wright, 745 P.2d 447, 450-51 (Utah 1987) (While finding no actual request for disposition was filed, Court concluded, nonetheless, that "at the time the [alleged request for disposition] was sent, defendant had not yet been charged with the ... robbery, and no untried indictment or information was pending against defendant. Thus, nothing triggered the statutory right to demand trial on any "untried indictment or information.'") (citation omitted); State v. Clark, 28 Utah 2d 272, 501 P.2d 274, 276 (1972) (<HOLDING>). 115 The purpose of the statute is to promote
holding that the state police is a state agency recognizing as persuasive state ex rel denmis v morphon108 252 so2d 845 flactapp1971 and citing its holding that any request for disposition filed before the charging information is a nullity holding that a second or subsequent state petition for postconviction relief filed according to the procedural rules of the state constitutes a properly filed application  without regard to the merits of the petition holding that a state application for relief had not been properly filed because it was not accompanied by an oath as required by state law holding that a public corporation in that case a commission created to provide information about the tva is an entity separate from the state and its acts are not acts of the state  within the meaning of the state constitutions prohibition against the state creating new debts