In State v. Babbel, 813 P.2d 86 (Utah 1991), the Court stated that "the purpose behind this provision . . . section 76-3-405 is to prevent the chilling effect on the constitutional right to appeal which the possibility of a harsher sentence would have on a defendant who might be able to demonstrate reversible error in his conviction." Id. at 88. In that case, the Court held that section 76-3-405 does not apply to a correction of an illegal sentence because "the correction of an illegal sentence stands on a different footing than the correction of an error in a conviction." Id. This is so, in part, because "a defendant is not likely to appeal a sentence that is unlawfully lenient, and there is, therefore, minimal chilling effect on the right to appeal." Id.