Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 19-2503 (2026)
Presence of defendant.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Presence of defendant.
For the purpose of judgment, if the conviction is for a felony, the defendant must be personally present; if for a misdemeanor, judgment may be pronounced in his absence.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2023 · leading case: State v. Creech, 670 P.2d 463 (Idaho 1983).
State v. Creech, 670 P.2d 463 (Idaho 1983). “§ 9-2827; and "It appearing from the record, without any contention otherwise by the respondent *516 State of Idaho, that contrary to the requirements of I.C. § 19-2503 and I.C.R. 43(a), the trial judge purported to impose sentence in the absence of defendant and his counsel and…”
Sivak v. State, 731 P.2d 192 (Idaho 1986). “I.C. § 19-2503 and I.C.R. 43(a) require that a defendant's sentence be given in open court with the defendant and his counsel present.”
State v. Sivak, 674 P.2d 396 (Idaho 1983). “Because I.C. § 19-2503 and I.C.R. 43(a) require that a defendant's sentence be given in open court with the defendant and counsel present, this Court, by order issued on March 24, 1983, vacated the sentence of death and remanded to the district court for imposition of a sentence…”
State v. Urrabazo, 244 P.3d 1244 (Idaho 2010). “However, “[t]his power is subject to legislative law-making authority,” and the Legislature carved out an exception to the exclusive control vested with the executive branch over convicted and sentenced persons when it created the retained jurisdiction program.”
State v. Searcy, 798 P.2d 914 (Idaho 1990). “" Searcy argues on appeal that the original sentence (which included two 10-year enhancements) being invalid, the trial court could not correct the invalid sentence without having the defendant present in court, as required by I.”
State v. James Leroy Skunkcap, 335 P.3d 561 (Idaho 2014). “Defendant has not argued on appeal that he had the right to be present at the resentencing pursuant to Idaho Code section 19-2503.”
State v. Lawrence, 730 P.2d 1069 (Idaho Ct. App. 1986). “43(a) and I.C. § 19-2503 to require the presence of defense counsel when sentence is pronounced.”
State v. Calley, 99 P.3d 616 (Idaho 2004). “2d 373 (1991); I.C. § 19-2503 (1997). The sentence in the Canyon County case had been pronounced on December 15, 1998, over three years before Calley was sentenced in the Twin Falls County case.”
United States v. Sharp, 179 P.3d 1059 (Idaho 2008). “” Idaho Code § 19-2503 requires, “For the purpose of judgment, if the conviction is for a felony, the defendant must be personally present; if for a misdemeanor, judgment may be pronounced in his absence.”
State v. Cisneros-Gonzalez, 112 P.3d 782 (Idaho 2004). “2d 373 (1991); I.C. § 19-2503 (1997). Cisneros-Gonzalez admitted during oral argument that if “pronounced” means “announced,” Bello was incorrectly decided.”
State v. Dillard, 718 P.2d 1272 (Idaho Ct. App. 1986). “The court accomplished this by written order without Dillard being present.”
State v. Money, 710 P.2d 667 (Idaho Ct. App. 1985). “I.C. § 19-2503, I.C.R. 43(a). A defendant’s presence at the time of sentencing is mandatory.”
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.