Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 19-2523 (2026)
Consideration of mental illness in sentencing.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Consideration of mental illness in sentencing.
(1) Evidence of mental condition shall be received, if offered, at the time of sentencing of any person convicted of a crime. In determining the sentence to be imposed in addition to other criteria provided by law, if the defendant’s mental condition is a significant factor, the court shall consider such factors as:
(a) The extent to which the defendant is mentally ill;
(b) The degree of illness or defect and level of functional impairment;
(c) The prognosis for improvement or rehabilitation;
(d) The availability of treatment and level of care required;
(e) Any risk of danger which the defendant may create for the public, if at large, or the absence of such risk;
(f) The capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law at the time of the offense charged.
(2) The court shall authorize treatment during the period of confinement or probation specified in the sentence if, after the sentencing hearing, it concludes by clear and convincing evidence that:
(a) The defendant suffers from a severe and reliably diagnosable mental illness or defect resulting in the defendant’s inability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law;
(b) Without treatment, the immediate prognosis is for major distress resulting in serious mental or physical deterioration of the defendant;
(c) Treatment is available for such illness or defect;
(d) The relative risks and benefits of treatment or nontreatment are such that a reasonable person would consent to treatment. (of the offense charged.)
(3) In addition to the authorization of treatment, the court shall pronounce sentence as provided by law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 54
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2021 · leading case: State v. Card, 825 P.2d 1081 (Idaho 1991).
State v. Card, 825 P.2d 1081 (Idaho 1991). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 specifically requires the sentencing court to consider "[t]he capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the offense charged.”
Hollon v. State, 976 P.2d 927 (Idaho 1999). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 uses mandatory language of “shall” and we have previously stated that I.”
State v. Miller, 264 P.3d 935 (Idaho 2011). “We also hold that the district court acted consistent with I.C. § 19-2523 and I.C § 19-2521 and did not abuse its discretion when sentencing Miller.”
State v. Delling, 267 P.3d 709 (Idaho 2011). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 specifically requires the sentencing court to consider ‘[t]he capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the offense charged.”
State v. Leach, 20 P.3d 709 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 (1) delineates certain factors that the court is to consider if a defendant’s mental condition is a significant factor at sentencing: (1) Evidence of mental condition shall be received, if offered, at the time of sentencing of any person convicted of a crime.”
State v. Windom, 253 P.3d 310 (Idaho 2011). “§ 19-2523; Hollon v. State, 132 Idaho 573, 581 , 976 P.”
Fenstermaker v. State, 912 P.2d 653 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “The statute also provides that, if the defendant's mental condition is a significant factor, the court shall consider such factors as: (a) the extent to which the defendant is mentally ill; (b) the degree of illness or defect and level of functional impairment; (c) the prognosis…”
State v. Strand, 50 P.3d 472 (Idaho 2002). “The factors listed in Idaho Code § 19-2523 provide a manner in which to evaluate the mental health information presented to the sentencing court.”
State v. Odiaga, 871 P.2d 801 (Idaho 1994). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 , which requires that the trial court consider the defendant’s mental illness as a sentencing factor, was an integral part of the legislature’s repeal of mental condition as a defense.”
State v. McDougall, 749 P.2d 1025 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). “[1] The district court sentenced McDougall to indeterminate periods of fifteen years for the battery and five years each for the three assaults, with all sentences to run concurrently.”
Medrano v. State, 903 P.2d 1336 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 (1) permits the court to consider evidence offered with respect to the defendant’s mental condition, in addition to other criteria provided by law, in determining the *644 sentence to be imposed.”
Knutsen v. State, 163 P.3d 222 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). “The neuropsychological evaluation stated that, after being placed on psychotropic medications while incarcerated, Knutsen was able to be significantly more compliant. If the court had been made aware of Knutseris bi-polar condition and the potential for effective treatment at…”
— Idaho Code § 19-2523(1) — 12 cases
State v. Windom, 253 P.3d 310 (Idaho 2011). “§ 19-2523; Hollon v. State, 132 Idaho 573, 581 , 976 P.”
State v. Card, 825 P.2d 1081 (Idaho 1991). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 specifically requires the sentencing court to consider "[t]he capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the offense charged.”
Medrano v. State, 903 P.2d 1336 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 (1) permits the court to consider evidence offered with respect to the defendant’s mental condition, in addition to other criteria provided by law, in determining the *644 sentence to be imposed.”
State v. Odiaga, 871 P.2d 801 (Idaho 1994). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 , which requires that the trial court consider the defendant’s mental illness as a sentencing factor, was an integral part of the legislature’s repeal of mental condition as a defense.”
State v. Leach, 20 P.3d 709 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 (1) delineates certain factors that the court is to consider if a defendant’s mental condition is a significant factor at sentencing: (1) Evidence of mental condition shall be received, if offered, at the time of sentencing of any person convicted of a crime.”
— Idaho Code § 19-2523(1)(a) — 4 cases
Fenstermaker v. State, 912 P.2d 653 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “The statute also provides that, if the defendant's mental condition is a significant factor, the court shall consider such factors as: (a) the extent to which the defendant is mentally ill; (b) the degree of illness or defect and level of functional impairment; (c) the prognosis…”
State v. Plummer (Idaho Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Brian Richard Ford (Idaho Ct. App. 2013).
State v. Christina Alicia Bolan (Idaho Ct. App. 2013).
— Idaho Code § 19-2523(1)(f) — 2 cases
State v. Shultz, 233 P.3d 732 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).
State v. Olivia Kay Schultz (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).
— Idaho Code § 19-2523(2) — 9 cases
Knutsen v. State, 163 P.3d 222 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). “The neuropsychological evaluation stated that, after being placed on psychotropic medications while incarcerated, Knutsen was able to be significantly more compliant. If the court had been made aware of Knutseris bi-polar condition and the potential for effective treatment at…”
State v. Leach, 20 P.3d 709 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 (1) delineates certain factors that the court is to consider if a defendant’s mental condition is a significant factor at sentencing: (1) Evidence of mental condition shall be received, if offered, at the time of sentencing of any person convicted of a crime.”
State v. Durham, 195 P.3d 723 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008).
State v. Collins, 162 P.3d 787 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Shultz, 233 P.3d 732 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).
— Idaho Code § 19-2523(l)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Miller, 264 P.3d 935 (Idaho 2011). “We also hold that the district court acted consistent with I.C. § 19-2523 and I.C § 19-2521 and did not abuse its discretion when sentencing Miller.”
State v. Delling, 267 P.3d 709 (Idaho 2011). “Idaho Code § 19-2523 specifically requires the sentencing court to consider ‘[t]he capacity of the defendant to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the offense charged.”
Fenstermaker v. State, 912 P.2d 653 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “The statute also provides that, if the defendant's mental condition is a significant factor, the court shall consider such factors as: (a) the extent to which the defendant is mentally ill; (b) the degree of illness or defect and level of functional impairment; (c) the prognosis…”
State v. Kristina M. Quintana, 306 P.3d 209 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013).
— Idaho Code § 19-2523(l)(f) — 2 cases
State v. Durham, 195 P.3d 723 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008).
State v. Collins, 162 P.3d 787 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007).
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.