Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 18-8314 (2026)

Powers and duties of the sexual offender management board. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Powers and duties of the sexual offender management board. 

(1) The board shall develop, advance and oversee sound sexual offender management policies and practices statewide as demonstrated by evidence-based best practices.

(2)  The board shall carry out the following duties:
(a)  Establish standards for psychosexual evaluations performed pursuant to section 18-8316, Idaho Code, and sexual offender treatment programs based on current and evolving best practices.
(b)  Establish qualifications, set forth procedures for approval and certification, and administer the certification process for:
(i)   Professionals conducting psychosexual evaluations pursuant to section 18-8316, Idaho Code, or adjudication proceedings on juvenile sexual offenders;
(ii)  Professionals providing treatment to adult or juvenile sexual offenders as ordered or required by the court, the Idaho department of correction, the Idaho commission of pardons and parole, or the Idaho department of juvenile corrections; and
(iii) Professionals conducting post-conviction sexual offender polygraphs as ordered or required by the court, the Idaho department of correction, or the Idaho commission of pardons and parole.
(c)  Establish a nonrefundable processing fee not to exceed one hundred fifty dollars ($150) for each initial certification and a nonrefundable processing fee not to exceed one hundred fifty dollars ($150) for each annual recertification.
(d)  Set forth and administer procedures for quality assurance of the standards and qualifications established in this section.
(e)  The board shall have authority to deny, revoke, restrict or suspend a certification if standards or qualifications are not met or to otherwise monitor a provider.
(f)  Establish and implement standard protocols for sexual offender management, assessment and classification based on current and evolving best practices.
(g)  Manage and maintain the records of the former sexual offender classification board.
(3)  The board shall have authority to promulgate rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 2000–2020 · leading case: Smith v. State, 203 P.3d 1221 (Idaho 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Smith v. State, 203 P.3d 1221 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 36× “Idaho Code § 18-8314 (5)(1)-(b). The actual guidelines adopted by the SOCB do not even mention the nine "general categories for risk assessment" listed in the statute.”
Meinders v. Weber, 2000 SD 2 (S.D. 2000). · cites it 4× “1998) (providing for different periods of registration and different levels of public notification based on risk assessment tier assigned to offender); Idaho Code § 18-8314 (Supp. 1998) (duty of sexual offender classification board to determine whether an offender is a violent…”
State v. Guzman, 486 P.3d 532 (Idaho Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 8× “) Similarly, I.C. § 18-8314 empowers the sexual offender management board with the authority to establish qualifications for professionals providing sexual offender treatment and conducting post-conviction polygraphs “as ordered or required by the court, Idaho department of…”
State v. Garry K. Widmyer, 313 P.3d 770 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “An evaluation conducted pursuant to this section shall be done in accordance with the standards established by the board pursuant to section 18-8314, Idaho Code. Widmyer argues that because injury to a child is not among the offenses listed under 1.”
Lightner v. State, 127 P.3d 227 (Idaho Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× ““Violent sexual predator” is defined as "a person who has been convicted of an offense listed in section 18-8314, Idaho Code, and who has been determined to pose a high risk of committing an offense or *328 engaging in predatory sexual conduct.”
State v. David Leroy Lee, 328 P.3d 424 (Idaho 2014). · cites it 2× “While the duty to register as a sex offender is triggered simply by reason of conviction for a specified crime, classification as a VSP is based upon a factual determination of probable future conduct, i.”
State v. Guzman (Idaho Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “) Similarly, I.C. § 18-8314 empowers the sexual offender management board with the authority to establish qualifications for professionals providing sexual offender treatment and conducting post-conviction polygraphs “as ordered or required by the court, Idaho department of…”
State v. Guzman (Idaho Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “) Similarly, I.C. § 18-8314 empowers the sexual offender management board with the authority to establish qualifications for professionals providing sexual offender treatment and conducting post-conviction polygraphs “as ordered or required by the court, Idaho department of…”
Morgan v. Sexual Offender Class. Bd., 197 P.3d 797 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 6× “In reviewing Morgan's claim that his case falls outside of the typical case and he should not be designated as a VSP, the district court determined: According to the statute, the classification of a violent sexual predator is defined by statute to be any person who is guilty of…”
State v. Knapp, 79 P.3d 740 (Idaho Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “See I.C. § 18-8314. Determination of which category a given offender falls into is made by the Sexual Offender Classification Board, a division of the Department of Correction.”
Evan Edward Morgan, Jr. v. Sexual Offender Classification Bd. (Idaho 2009). · cites it 2× “According to statute, a VSP is someone who has been convicted of one of the crimes enumerated in I.C. § 18-8314, one of which is lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor (I.”
Morgan v. Sexual Offender Classification Bd., 220 P.3d 314 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 2× “According to statute, a VSP is someone who has been convicted of one of the crimes enumerated in I.C. § 18-8314, one of which is lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor (I.”
— Idaho Code § 18-8314(1) — 1 case
Smith v. State, 203 P.3d 1221 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 18-8314 (5)(1)-(b). The actual guidelines adopted by the SOCB do not even mention the nine "general categories for risk assessment" listed in the statute.”
— Idaho Code § 18-8314(5) — 2 cases
Smith v. State, 203 P.3d 1221 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 18-8314 (5)(1)-(b). The actual guidelines adopted by the SOCB do not even mention the nine "general categories for risk assessment" listed in the statute.”
Morgan v. Sexual Offender Class. Bd., 197 P.3d 797 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008). “In reviewing Morgan's claim that his case falls outside of the typical case and he should not be designated as a VSP, the district court determined: According to the statute, the classification of a violent sexual predator is defined by statute to be any person who is guilty of…”
— Idaho Code § 18-8314(7) — 1 case
Smith v. State, 203 P.3d 1221 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 18-8314 (5)(1)-(b). The actual guidelines adopted by the SOCB do not even mention the nine "general categories for risk assessment" listed in the statute.”
— Idaho Code § 18-8314(8) — 1 case
Smith v. State, 203 P.3d 1221 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 18-8314 (5)(1)-(b). The actual guidelines adopted by the SOCB do not even mention the nine "general categories for risk assessment" listed in the statute.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.