interpretation of a criminal rule (Idaho) · Go Syfert
← Idaho issues

interpretation of a criminal rule in Idaho

6 Idaho opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2023 4 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.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Castrogreen
idaho · 2008 · cited in 5 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2009–2023
2 sentences

2023STANDARDS OF REVIEW “Where the lower court’s decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review.” State v. Brown, 170 Idaho 439 , 511 P.3d 859 , 865–66 (2022) (quoting State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008)).

2023STANDARDS OF REVIEW “Where the lower court’s decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review.” State v. Brown, 170 Idaho 439 , 511 P.3d 859 , 865–66 (2022) (quoting State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008)).

55
Doe v. Stategreen
idahoctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023
2 sentences

2023This Court “exercises free review over the trial court’s determination as to whether constitutional requirements have been satisfied in light of the facts found.” State v. Hooper, 145 Idaho 139, 142 , 176 P.3d 911, 914 (2007) (citing Doe v. State, 133 Idaho 811, 813 , 992 P.2d 1211, 1213 (Ct. App. 1999)).

2023This Court “exercises free review over the trial court’s determination as to whether constitutional requirements have been satisfied in light of the facts found.” State v. Hooper, 145 Idaho 139, 142 , 176 P.3d 911, 914 (2007) (citing Doe v. State, 133 Idaho 811, 813 , 992 P.2d 1211, 1213 (Ct. App. 1999)).

11
State v. Hoopergreen
idaho · 2007 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023
2 sentences

2023This Court “exercises free review over the trial court’s determination as to whether constitutional requirements have been satisfied in light of the facts found.” State v. Hooper, 145 Idaho 139, 142 , 176 P.3d 911, 914 (2007) (citing Doe v. State, 133 Idaho 811, 813 , 992 P.2d 1211, 1213 (Ct. App. 1999)).

2023This Court “exercises free review over the trial court’s determination as to whether constitutional requirements have been satisfied in light of the facts found.” State v. Hooper, 145 Idaho 139, 142 , 176 P.3d 911, 914 (2007) (citing Doe v. State, 133 Idaho 811, 813 , 992 P.2d 1211, 1213 (Ct. App. 1999)).

11
Heflin v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1959 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009"Where the lower court's decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review." State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008). *1146 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 was adopted from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35, which originally read: "The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence." Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 (1944). "[Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35] `was a codification of existing law and was intended to remove any dou

2009"Where the lower court's decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review." State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008). *1146 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 was adopted from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35, which originally read: "The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence." Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 (1944). "[Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35] `was a codification of existing law and was intended to remove any dou

11
State v. Lariosgreen
idaho · 1997 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008State v. Weber, 140 Idaho 89, 91-92 , 90 P.3d 314, 316-317 (2004) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 11(c)); State v. Larios, 129 Idaho 631, 633 , 931 P.2d 625, 627 (1997) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 25(a)).

2008State v. Weber, 140 Idaho 89, 91-92 , 90 P.3d 314, 316-317 (2004) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 11(c)); State v. Larios, 129 Idaho 631, 633 , 931 P.2d 625, 627 (1997) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 25(a)).

11
State v. Webergreen
idaho · 2004 · cited in 1 Idaho opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008State v. Weber, 140 Idaho 89, 91-92 , 90 P.3d 314, 316-317 (2004) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 11(c)); State v. Larios, 129 Idaho 631, 633 , 931 P.2d 625, 627 (1997) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 25(a)).

2008State v. Weber, 140 Idaho 89, 91-92 , 90 P.3d 314, 316-317 (2004) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 11(c)); State v. Larios, 129 Idaho 631, 633 , 931 P.2d 625, 627 (1997) (reviewing the trial court’s interpretation of I.C.R. 25(a)).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Brown green
idaho · 2022
2 sentences

2023STANDARDS OF REVIEW “Where the lower court’s decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review.” State v. Brown, 170 Idaho 439 , 511 P.3d 859 , 865–66 (2022) (quoting State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008)).

2023STANDARDS OF REVIEW “Where the lower court’s decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review.” State v. Brown, 170 Idaho 439 , 511 P.3d 859 , 865–66 (2022) (quoting State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008)).

12023–2023
United States v. Mayer green
scotus · 1914
2 sentences

2009"Where the lower court's decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review." State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008). *1146 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 was adopted from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35, which originally read: "The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence." Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 (1944). "[Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35] `was a codification of existing law and was intended to remove any dou

2009"Where the lower court's decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review." State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008). *1146 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 was adopted from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35, which originally read: "The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence." Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 (1944). "[Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35] `was a codification of existing law and was intended to remove any dou

12009–2009
Hill v. United States green
scotus · 1962
2 sentences

2009"Where the lower court's decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review." State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008). *1146 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 was adopted from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35, which originally read: "The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence." Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 (1944). "[Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35] `was a codification of existing law and was intended to remove any dou

2009"Where the lower court's decision turns on the interpretation of a criminal rule, this Court exercises free review." State v. Castro, 145 Idaho 173, 175 , 177 P.3d 387, 389 (2008). *1146 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 was adopted from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35, which originally read: "The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence." Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 (1944). "[Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35] `was a codification of existing law and was intended to remove any dou

12009–2009

Statutes the citing opinions construe

ID § Idaho Code § 19-2601 (3) ID § Idaho Code § 20-221 (3)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check