Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 19-1512 (2026)
Right to counsel.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Right to counsel.
If the defendant appears for arraignment without counsel he must be informed by the court that it is his right to have counsel before being arraigned, and must be asked if he desires the aid of counsel.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1950–1974 · leading case: Abercrombie v. State, 428 P.2d 505 (Idaho 1967).
Abercrombie v. State, 428 P.2d 505 (Idaho 1967). “Even before Idaho had been admitted to the Union our legislators enacted legislation relating to the right to counsel: "If the defendant appears for arraignment without counsel he must be informed by the court that it is his right to have counsel before being arraigned, and must…”
Pharris v. State, 424 P.2d 390 (Idaho 1967). “The crucial question presented to this court is whether prior to his entry of a plea of guilty to the crime of grand larceny appellant knowingly, competently and intelligently waived his statutory right to the aid and assistance of court-appointed counsel, *457 I.C. § 19-1512, 1…”
McNeal v. Culver, 365 U.S. 109 (1961). “Idaho: Idaho Code Ann. §§ 19-1512 , 19-1513. Illinois: Ill.”
Bement v. State, 422 P.2d 55 (Idaho 1966). “” I.C. § 19-1512. 2 Since it was the court’s further duty to “assign counsel” if appellant “desire [d] and [was] unable to employ counsel,” ibid.”
Foster v. Walus, 347 P.2d 120 (Idaho 1959). “This Court, as in the matter of preliminary examinations, has recognized that one accused of an indictable misdemeanor or a felony is not entitled to have an attorney appointed at public expense as a matter of right to represent him at a preliminary examination under, the…”
State v. Thurlow, 375 P.2d 996 (Idaho 1962). “§ 19-1512 were not otherwise complied with.”
Jones v. State, 477 P.2d 101 (Idaho 1970). “In February of 1966, I.C. § 19-1512 governed, which provided for appointment of counsel at county expense at the time of arraignment in district court.”
Starkey v. State, 415 P.2d 717 (Idaho 1966). “The only interrogations of plaintiff shown by the record were those conducted by the district judge; first on his arraignment for plea, which was conducted in compliance with I.C. §§ 19-1512 through 19-1516; and second on his arraignment for sentence, which was conducted in…”
State v. Alldredge, 523 P.2d 824 (Idaho 1974). “2d 55 (1966); I.C. § 19-1512. While trial courts presently follow more elaborate practices in explaining a defendant’s right to counsel, we do not find that the trial court’s explanation to appellant in 1964 concerning his right to counsel was constitutionally defective.”
State v. Lawrence, 220 P.2d 380 (Idaho 1950). “True, all persons are presumed to know the law, but we cannot disregard the idea contained in Section 19-1512, I.C., i. e., that a defendant charged with felony has a right to counsel if he wishes, which presupposes counsel may aid with his superior knowledge of the intricacies…”
State v. Eikelberger, 215 P.2d 996 (Idaho 1950). “The court apparently held that Sections 19-1512,1.C., and 19-1513,1.C., governing procedure in the district court, did not empower him to appoint counsel for defendant upon an appeal because the proceedings were upon a “complaint” and not upon an “information or indictment.”
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.