Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 19-2510 (2026)

Arraignment for sentence. 

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

Arraignment for sentence. 

When the defendant appears for judgment he must be informed by the court, or by the clerk, under its direction, of the nature of the indictment and of his plea, and the verdict if any thereon, and must be asked whether he has any legal cause to show why judgment should not be pronounced against him.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1966–2015 · leading case: State v. Azad Haji Abdullah, 348 P.3d 1 (Idaho 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Azad Haji Abdullah, 348 P.3d 1 (Idaho 2015). · cites it 8× “I.C. § 19-2510 (emphasis added). These two provisions provide the foundation for the right to allocute in Idaho.”
State v. Coutts, 609 P.2d 642 (Idaho 1980). · cites it 8× “This latter right, which is currently embodied in I.C. § 19-2510 [1] and I.C.R. 32(a)(1), [2] was established as a part of the Idaho law in the Criminal Practice Act of 1864, 1864 Idaho Sess.”
Starkey v. State, 415 P.2d 717 (Idaho 1966). · cites it 2× “§§ 19-1512 through 19-1516; and second on his arraignment for sentence, which was conducted in compliance with I.C. § 19-2510. On this latter occasion, at the request of the court, the prosecuting attorney made a statement of the case, and plaintiff was sworn and examined as a…”
Charles Sheldton Coleman v. State (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “” It is apparently Coleman’s position that at sentencing the district court failed to comply with the statute because it posed the question to Coleman’s attorney rather than to Coleman himself, and that the judgment of conviction incorrectly states that “the defendant, and his…”
State v. Rosendo Lopez Guevara (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Thus, Guevara has failed to demonstrate his sentence is illegal on this ground.”
State v. Christopher Harrison (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “It is not at all apparent that this is error, for no reported Idaho appellate court decision holds that the question mandated by I.C. § 19-2510 must be answered by the defendant personally.”
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.