Richard Kriebel, of the Court of Appeals case holding that Estrada does not announce a new rule and is not retroactive, will seek review in the Idaho Supreme Court.
Mr. Kriebel argued that Estrada did announce a new rule as applied to him because at the time of his JOC there was a Court of Appeals case (State v. Curless) that held a psychosexual evaluation was not a critical stage in the proceedings (opposite of what Estrada held).
In my opinion, we need to keep pressing this issue until we get a definitive answer from the Idaho Supreme Court. (Vavold only indicates it is not a new rule by way of dicta.)
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment