concluded analysis in Idaho

2023In Loera, 167 Idaho 533 , 473 P.3d 802 , the Court concluded that a claim for restitution by the State Insurance Fund under I.C. § 19-5304 (supported by only a summary showing the medical provider, the dates of treatment and the amounts paid but no description of the treatments) was insufficient.

2023In Loera, 167 Idaho 533 , 473 P.3d 802 , the Court concluded that a claim for restitution by the State Insurance Fund under I.C. § 19-5304 (supported by only a summary showing the medical provider, the dates of treatment and the amounts paid but no description of the treatments) was insufficient.

2023Likewise, in State v. Oxford, 167 Idaho 515 , 473 P.3d 784 (2020), the Court reversed an order for restitution to the Crime Victims Compensation Program under I.C. § 19-5304 for payments made on behalf of a victim when the evidence submitted was an unsworn letter that did not provide descriptions of the types of services provided and the date of such services.

2023Likewise, in State v. Oxford, 167 Idaho 515 , 473 P.3d 784 (2020), the Court reversed an order for restitution to the Crime Victims Compensation Program under I.C. § 19-5304 for payments made on behalf of a victim when the evidence submitted was an unsworn letter that did not provide descriptions of the types of services provided and the date of such services.

2019This Court distinguished Roach in State v. Brummett, 150 Idaho 339 , 247 P.3d 204 (Ct. App. 2010), a case in which the defendant’s intent was at issue.

2019This Court distinguished Roach in State v. Brummett, 150 Idaho 339 , 247 P.3d 204 (Ct. App. 2010), a case in which the defendant’s intent was at issue.

2019The Court concluded the error was not harmless, ruling: “If the evidence of [the defendant’s] prior record had been excluded, we are not prepared to declare beyond a reasonable doubt that the jury would have arrived at the same verdict of felonious possession of marijuana, based on the remaining evidence.” Id.

2012Id. at 260 , 16 P.3d at 936 .

2012Id. at 260 , 16 P.3d at 936 .

2008Id.

1996The Court concluded that the exception, i.e., the phrase “except upon the written prescription” was “an integral part of the offense proscribed and is so incorporated with the description of the offense as to be a material element of it.” Id.

1993In Bowler v. Board of Trustees, 101 Idaho 537 , 617 P.2d 841 (1980), the Court overturned a summary judgment based on laches and noted: “Laches ... requires a showing of prejudice to the party assertion it...

1993In Bowler v. Board of Trustees, 101 Idaho 537 , 617 P.2d 841 (1980), the Court overturned a summary judgment based on laches and noted: “Laches ... requires a showing of prejudice to the party assertion it...

1993The Court concluded that the defense of laches “ordinarily requires a thorough presentation of all the relevant facts and is a factual determination.” Id.

1990In Turner v. Cole, 559 S.W.2d 170 (Ky.App.1977), the court concluded its analysis of an issue similar to that we face today by stating that: “It is the opinion of this court that the wording of this ordinance relating solely to employees effectively excluded the chief of police therefrom.” Undaunted by these legal obstacles, Bunt argues nevertheless that the Mayor and City Council at one point construed Ordinance 413 as applicable to the Chief of Police.

1987Paul Railway Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 47 Idaho 346 , 275 P. *555 780 (1929). 1 The court also noted that our legislature recently had enacted I.C. § 12-117, providing for recovery of attorney fees, witness fees, and expenses in any administrative or civil judicial proceeding involving as adverse parties a state agency and a person, where “the court finds in favor of the person and also finds that the state agency acted without a reasonable basis in fact or law.” 1984 Idaho Sess.