12 Idaho opinions name it 2 courts 1923–1982 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Idaho courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Uriegreen2 sentences1982State v. Urie, 92 Idaho 71, 74 , 437 P.2d 24, 27 (1968). 1982State v. Urie, 92 Idaho 71, 74 , 437 P.2d 24, 27 (1968). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Growgreen2 sentences1977See, State v. Grow, 93 Idaho 588, 593 , 468 P.2d 320, 325 (1970), where it was held that “the elements of the crime which the state ‘proved’ were not sufficient in law to warrant a conviction,” and this Court affirmed a trial court’s granting of a motion to give an advisory instruction to acquit. 1977See, State v. Grow, 93 Idaho 588, 593 , 468 P.2d 320, 325 (1970), where it was held that “the elements of the crime which the state ‘proved’ were not sufficient in law to warrant a conviction,” and this Court affirmed a trial court’s granting of a motion to give an advisory instruction to acquit. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Haverlygreen2 sentences1970While the error assigned was the failure to give an advisory instruction to acquit the court in holding that the action of the district court was proper stated: “The giving of such instruction is a matter of discretion with the trial court, and its action is not reviewable here.” 4 Idaho 484 at 485, 486 , 42 P. 506 at 506 (1895). 1970While the error assigned was the failure to give an advisory instruction to acquit the court in holding that the action of the district court was proper stated: “The giving of such instruction is a matter of discretion with the trial court, and its action is not reviewable here.” 4 Idaho 484 at 485, 486 , 42 P. 506 at 506 (1895). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hansongreen2 sentences1970Giving or refusing to give such instruction being a matter in the discretion of the trial court and one upon which error cannot be predicated, no appeal lies from the action of the court in giving or refusing to give such instruction.” 37 Idaho 734 at 736 , 219 P. 1062 at 1062 (1923). 1970Giving or refusing to give such instruction being a matter in the discretion of the trial court and one upon which error cannot be predicated, no appeal lies from the action of the court in giving or refusing to give such instruction.” 37 Idaho 734 at 736 , 219 P. 1062 at 1062 (1923). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Powaukeegreen2 sentences1965But the jury are not bound by the advice.” In the case of State v. Powaukee, 78 Idaho 257, 261 , 300 P.2d 488, 490 (1956), the court has said: “ * * * 'Where there is no evidence on which to base a verdict of guilty, it is still the right and duty of the trial court, upon proper motion, to direct an acquittal. * * * Where, however, the evidence is merely insufficient, the court must then advise the jury to acquit, which advice the jury is not bound to follow.’ ” See also State v. McCallum, 77 Idaho 489 , 295 P.2d 259 (1956). 1965But the jury are not bound by the advice.” In the case of State v. Powaukee, 78 Idaho 257, 261 , 300 P.2d 488, 490 (1956), the court has said: “ * * * 'Where there is no evidence on which to base a verdict of guilty, it is still the right and duty of the trial court, upon proper motion, to direct an acquittal. * * * Where, however, the evidence is merely insufficient, the court must then advise the jury to acquit, which advice the jury is not bound to follow.’ ” See also State v. McCallum, 77 Idaho 489 , 295 P.2d 259 (1956). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Puckett
green
2 sentences1966In State v. Dickens, 69 Idaho 497, 498 , 210 P.2d 384 (1949), this court reiterated the rule: “It has been uniformly held in this state that refusal of the trial court to give an advisory instruction to acquit is not, reversible error, nor is it reviewable in this court.” See also: State v. Puckett, 88 Idaho 546 , 401 P.2d 784 (1965) and cases therein cited. 1966In State v. Dickens, 69 Idaho 497, 498 , 210 P.2d 384 (1949), this court reiterated the rule: “It has been uniformly held in this state that refusal of the trial court to give an advisory instruction to acquit is not, reversible error, nor is it reviewable in this court.” See also: State v. Puckett, 88 Idaho 546 , 401 P.2d 784 (1965) and cases therein cited. | 2 | 1966–1969 |
State v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences1925(State v. Chacon, 36 Ida. 148 , 209 Pac. 889 ; State v. Sullivan, 34 Ida. 68 , 199 Pac. 647 , 17 L. 1925(State v. Chacon, 36 Ida. 148 , 209 Pac. 889 ; State v. Sullivan, 34 Ida. 68 , 199 Pac. 647 , 17 L. | 2 | 1923–1925 |
State v. Wozniak
green
2 sentences1979State v. Wozniak, 94 Idaho 312 , 486 P.2d 1025 (1971). 1979State v. Wozniak, 94 Idaho 312 , 486 P.2d 1025 (1971). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
State v. Jesser
green
2 sentences1977As the Court in State v. Jesser, 95 Idaho 43 , 501 P.2d 727 (1972), noted after setting forth the requirement of proof of intent in the mind of the perpetrator: “Because the jury returned verdicts of guilty, they are presumed to have found that when the grain in question was loaded at Sowards grainery, the appellants intended permanently to deprive Sowards of his property.” The trial court in the case at bar could have directed a verdict or given an advisory instruction for an acquittal if he believed there was insufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict. 1977As the Court in State v. Jesser, 95 Idaho 43 , 501 P.2d 727 (1972), noted after setting forth the requirement of proof of intent in the mind of the perpetrator: “Because the jury returned verdicts of guilty, they are presumed to have found that when the grain in question was loaded at Sowards grainery, the appellants intended permanently to deprive Sowards of his property.” The trial court in the case at bar could have directed a verdict or given an advisory instruction for an acquittal if he believed there was insufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Kazda
green
2 sentences1977The State, on the other hand, while agreeing that it presented no direct evidence to prove the charge against Erwin, contends that the facts were sufficient to give rise to an inference of a felonious intent, placing reliance on State v. Kazda, 545 P.2d 190 (Utah 1976), and People v. Zaring, 547 P.2d 232 (Colo. 1976). 1977The State, on the other hand, while agreeing that it presented no direct evidence to prove the charge against Erwin, contends that the facts were sufficient to give rise to an inference of a felonious intent, placing reliance on State v. Kazda, 545 P.2d 190 (Utah 1976), and People v. Zaring, 547 P.2d 232 (Colo.1976). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
People v. Zaring
green
2 sentences1977The State, on the other hand, while agreeing that it presented no direct evidence to prove the charge against Erwin, contends that the facts were sufficient to give rise to an inference of a felonious intent, placing reliance on State v. Kazda, 545 P.2d 190 (Utah 1976), and People v. Zaring, 547 P.2d 232 (Colo. 1976). 1977The State, on the other hand, while agreeing that it presented no direct evidence to prove the charge against Erwin, contends that the facts were sufficient to give rise to an inference of a felonious intent, placing reliance on State v. Kazda, 545 P.2d 190 (Utah 1976), and People v. Zaring, 547 P.2d 232 (Colo.1976). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Dickens
green
2 sentences1966In State v. Dickens, 69 Idaho 497, 498 , 210 P.2d 384 (1949), this court reiterated the rule: “It has been uniformly held in this state that refusal of the trial court to give an advisory instruction to acquit is not, reversible error, nor is it reviewable in this court.” See also: State v. Puckett, 88 Idaho 546 , 401 P.2d 784 (1965) and cases therein cited. 1966In State v. Dickens, 69 Idaho 497, 498 , 210 P.2d 384 (1949), this court reiterated the rule: “It has been uniformly held in this state that refusal of the trial court to give an advisory instruction to acquit is not, reversible error, nor is it reviewable in this court.” See also: State v. Puckett, 88 Idaho 546 , 401 P.2d 784 (1965) and cases therein cited. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
State v. McCallum
green
2 sentences1965But the jury are not bound by the advice.” In the case of State v. Powaukee, 78 Idaho 257, 261 , 300 P.2d 488, 490 (1956), the court has said: “ * * * 'Where there is no evidence on which to base a verdict of guilty, it is still the right and duty of the trial court, upon proper motion, to direct an acquittal. * * * Where, however, the evidence is merely insufficient, the court must then advise the jury to acquit, which advice the jury is not bound to follow.’ ” See also State v. McCallum, 77 Idaho 489 , 295 P.2d 259 (1956). 1965But the jury are not bound by the advice.” In the case of State v. Powaukee, 78 Idaho 257, 261 , 300 P.2d 488, 490 (1956), the court has said: “ * * * 'Where there is no evidence on which to base a verdict of guilty, it is still the right and duty of the trial court, upon proper motion, to direct an acquittal. * * * Where, however, the evidence is merely insufficient, the court must then advise the jury to acquit, which advice the jury is not bound to follow.’ ” See also State v. McCallum, 77 Idaho 489 , 295 P.2d 259 (1956). | 1 | 1965–1965 |
State v. Conner
green
2 sentences1956But the jury are not bound by the advice.” In State v. Conner, 59 Idaho 695 , 89 P. 2d 197 , the defendant had been convicted of maintaining a liquor nuisance. 1956But the jury are not bound by the advice.” In State v. Conner, 59 Idaho 695 , 89 P. 2d 197 , the defendant had been convicted of maintaining a liquor nuisance. | 1 | 1956–1956 |
State v. Peck
neutral
2 sentences1955State v. Peck, 14 Idaho 712 , 95 P. 515 ; State v. Gruber, 19 Idaho 692 , 115 P. 1 . 1955State v. Peck, 14 Idaho 712 , 95 P. 515 ; State v. Gruber, 19 Idaho 692 , 115 P. 1 . | 1 | 1955–1955 |
State v. Gruber
neutral
2 sentences1955State v. Peck, 14 Idaho 712 , 95 P. 515 ; State v. Gruber, 19 Idaho 692 , 115 P. 1 . 1955State v. Peck, 14 Idaho 712 , 95 P. 515 ; State v. Gruber, 19 Idaho 692 , 115 P. 1 . | 1 | 1955–1955 |
In Re the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for Thomas
neutral
1 sentence1932(State v. McClurg, 50 Ida. 762 , 300 Pac. 898 ; State v. Stevens, 48 Ida. 335 , 282 Pac. 93 .) The remaining specifications that the evidence was insufficient and that the court should have sustained appellant’s motion to discharge the jury can be disposed of together. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
State v. McClurg
green
1 sentence1932(State v. McClurg, 50 Ida. 762 , 300 Pac. 898 ; State v. Stevens, 48 Ida. 335 , 282 Pac. 93 .) The remaining specifications that the evidence was insufficient and that the court should have sustained appellant’s motion to discharge the jury can be disposed of together. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
State v. Stevens
neutral
2 sentences1932(State v. McClurg, 50 Ida. 762 , 300 Pac. 898 ; State v. Stevens, 48 Ida. 335 , 282 Pac. 93 .) The remaining specifications that the evidence was insufficient and that the court should have sustained appellant’s motion to discharge the jury can be disposed of together. 1932(State v. McClurg, 50 Ida. 762 , 300 Pac. 898 ; State v. Stevens, 48 Ida. 335 , 282 Pac. 93 .) The remaining specifications that the evidence was insufficient and that the court should have sustained appellant’s motion to discharge the jury can be disposed of together. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
State v. Chacon
green
2 sentences1925(State v. Chacon, 36 Ida. 148 , 209 Pac. 889 ; State v. Sullivan, 34 Ida. 68 , 199 Pac. 647 , 17 L. 1925(State v. Chacon, 36 Ida. 148 , 209 Pac. 889 ; State v. Sullivan, 34 Ida. 68 , 199 Pac. 647 , 17 L. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.