On Deck: SCOID August Arguments

The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in six criminal law cases this month.

August 19: Paul Rhoades v. State is a post-conviction petition in a capital case where the district court denied petitioner's motion to amend his post-conviction petition with claims of prosecutorial misconduct.

August 21: State v. Michael Clements is a state's appeal from a district court order correcting an illegal sentence. It contends that the court did not have jurisdiction to examine the underlying facts of the case in order to determine whether the weapons enhancements originally imposed were proper.

August 24: Gene Stuart et al. v. State, is a consolidated appeal from six death-sentenced petitioners (Paul Rhoades, Randy McKinney, Gerry Pizzuto, David Card and James Hairston join Gene Stuart). These cases, upon remand from the USSCt present the question of whether Ring v. Arizona (jury must find all facts which made defendant eligible for death sentence) retroactively applies to their cases under Idaho state law even though it does not in federal habeas corpus pursuant to Schriro v. Summerlin.

August 26: State v. Jerome Korn is an appeal from a conviction for possession of wild or exotic animals and possession of deleterious exotic animals without a permit. As you might imagine, the case has an interesting set of facts, but the issue on appeal seems to be whether copies of orders from the bankruptcy court were admissible at trial even though they were not certified copies.

August 28: State v. Dale Shackelford presents several trial issues, including questions of hearsay, jury instructions on burden of proof and the unanimity requirement, a prosecutorial misconduct claim under Brady v. Maryland, and the right to counsel. In addition, the state has cross-appealed the district court's ruling setting aside the death sentence pursuant to Ring v. Arizona.

Lampien v. State concerns the scope of victim impact statements. In exchange for a plea to a Harboring a Felon, the state agreed to recommend probation and to not oppose a withheld judgment. At sentencing three police officers, who had been injured at a later time by Ms. Lampien's husband, i.e., the felon she was harboring, testified that she should go to prison. The court sentenced above the state's recommendation and imposed five years with three fixed.

SCOIDBlog will report on the opinions as soon as they are issued.