Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 19-2604 (2026)
Discharge of defendant — Amendment of judgment.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Discharge of defendant — Amendment of judgment.
(1) (a) Application for relief under this subsection may be made by the following persons who have pled guilty to or been found guilty of a crime:
(i) A defendant whose sentence has been suspended or who has received a withheld judgment;
(ii) A defendant in a felony case whose sentence has been commuted under section 19-2601 1., Idaho Code;
(iii) A defendant in a felony case upon whom the court has not imposed a sentence to the custody of the board of correction;
(iv) A defendant who has not been sentenced but who has successfully completed a drug court or mental health court program;
(v) A defendant in a misdemeanor case who has not been sentenced to serve a term in the county jail or whose sentence or any portion thereof has been suspended.
(b) Upon application of the defendant and upon satisfactory showing that:
(i) The court did not find, and the defendant did not admit, in any probation violation proceeding that the defendant violated any of the terms or conditions of any probation that may have been imposed; or
(ii) The defendant has successfully completed and graduated from an authorized drug court program or mental health court program and during any period of probation that may have been served following such graduation, the court did not find, and the defendant did not admit, in any probation violation proceeding that the defendant violated any of the terms or conditions of probation;
the court, if convinced by the showing made that there is no longer cause for continuing the period of probation should the defendant be on probation at the time of the application, and that there is good cause for granting the requested relief, may terminate the sentence or set aside the plea of guilty or conviction of the defendant, and finally dismiss the case and discharge the defendant or may amend the judgment of conviction from a term in the custody of the state board of correction to "confinement in a penal facility" for the number of days served prior to sentencing, and the amended judgment may be deemed to be a misdemeanor conviction. This shall apply to the cases in which defendants have been convicted before this law goes into effect, as well as to cases which arise thereafter. The final dismissal of the case as herein provided shall have the effect of restoring the defendant to his civil rights.
(2) If sentence has been imposed but suspended for any period during the first three hundred sixty-five (365) days of a sentence to the custody of the state board of correction, and the defendant placed upon probation as provided in subsection 4. of section 19-2601 or 19-2601A, Idaho Code, upon application of the defendant, the prosecuting attorney, or upon the court’s own motion, and upon satisfactory showing that:
(a) The court did not find, and the defendant did not admit, in any probation violation proceeding that the defendant violated any of the terms or conditions of probation; or
(b) The defendant has successfully completed and graduated from an authorized drug court program or mental health court program and during any period of probation that may have been served following such graduation, the court did not find, and the defendant did not admit, in any probation violation proceeding that the defendant violated any of the terms or conditions of probation;
the court may amend the judgment of conviction from a term in the custody of the state board of correction to "confinement in a penal facility" for the number of days served prior to suspension, and the amended judgment may be deemed to be a misdemeanor conviction.
(3) (a) In addition to the circumstances in which relief from a felony conviction may be granted under subsections (1) and (2) of this section, a defendant who has been convicted of a felony and who has been discharged from probation may apply to the sentencing court for a reduction of the conviction from a felony to a misdemeanor as provided in this subsection.
(b) If less than five (5) years have elapsed since the defendant’s discharge from probation, the application may be granted only if the prosecuting attorney stipulates to the reduction.
(c) If at least five (5) years have elapsed since the defendant’s discharge from probation, and if the defendant was convicted of any of the following offenses, the application may be granted only if the prosecuting attorney stipulates to the reduction:
(iii) Enticing of children (18-1509, Idaho Code);
(iv) Murder in the first or second degree (18-4003, Idaho Code);
(v) Voluntary manslaughter (18-4006(1), Idaho Code);
(vi) Assault with intent to commit murder (18-4015, Idaho Code);
(vii) Administering poison with intent to kill (18-4014, Idaho Code);
(viii) Kidnapping in the first degree (18-4502, Idaho Code);
(ix) Robbery (18-6501, Idaho Code);
(x) Trafficking (37-2732B, Idaho Code);
(xi) Threats against state officials of the executive, legislative or judicial branch, felony (18-1353A, Idaho Code);
(xii) Unlawful discharge of a firearm at a dwelling house, occupied building, vehicle or mobile home (18-3317, Idaho Code);
(xiii) Cannibalism (18-5003, Idaho Code);
(xiv) Unlawful use of destructive device or bomb (18-3320, Idaho Code);
(xv) Attempt, conspiracy or solicitation to commit any of the crimes described in subparagraphs (i) through (xiv) of this paragraph.
(d) The decision as to whether to grant such an application shall be in the discretion of the district court, provided that the application may be granted only if the court finds that:
(i) The defendant has not been convicted of any felony committed after the conviction from which relief is sought;
(ii) The defendant is not currently charged with any crime;
(iii) There is good cause for granting the reduction in sentence; and
(iv) In those cases where the stipulation of the prosecuting attorney is required under paragraph (b) or (c) of this subsection, the prosecuting attorney has so stipulated.
(e) If the court grants the application, the court shall reduce the felony conviction to a misdemeanor and amend the judgment of conviction for a term in the custody of the state board of correction to "confinement in a penal facility" for the number of days served prior to the judgment of conviction.
(4) Subsections (2) and (3) of this section shall not apply to any judgment of conviction for a violation of any offense requiring sex offender registration as set forth in section 18-8304, Idaho Code. A judgment of conviction for a violation of any offense requiring sex offender registration as set forth in section 18-8304, Idaho Code, shall not be subject to dismissal or reduction under this section. A conviction for the purposes of this chapter means that the person has pled guilty or has been found guilty, notwithstanding the form of the judgment or withheld judgment.
(5) A violation of the terms of an agreement of supervision with the board of correction by a person under the supervision of the board shall not preclude the granting of relief to that person under this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 103
cases (19 in the last 5 years), 1958–2025 · leading case: State v. Dorn, 94 P.3d 709 (Idaho Ct. App. 2004).
State v. Dorn, 94 P.3d 709 (Idaho Ct. App. 2004). “After successfully completing probation, Dorn filed a motion to dismiss the case or amend his conviction pursuant to I.C. § 19-2604, which authorizes dismissal or reduction of some types of charges if a defendant has completed probation without violations.”
State v. Samuel Thomas Glenn, 319 P.3d 1191 (Idaho 2014). “The district court had previously dismissed Glenn’s 2001 DUI conviction pursuant to I.C. § 19-2604. Glenn argues on appeal that the district court erred because Idaho Supreme Court precedent holds that cases dismissed pursuant to I.”
State v. Robinson, 142 P.3d 729 (Idaho 2006). “It provides, in pertinent part: If sentence has been imposed but suspended, or if sentence has been withheld, upon application of the defendant and upon satisfactory showing that the defendant has at all times complied with the terms and conditions upon which he was placed on…”
State v. Parkinson, 172 P.3d 1100 (Idaho 2007). “Thus, Parkinson filed a Petition for Expungement of Record pursuant to Idaho Code § 19-2604 . The district court denied his petition, finding it lacked authority to require the notation of this case to be stricken from the NCIC database.”
State v. Schwartz, 79 P.3d 719 (Idaho 2003). “This is an appeal from an order of the district court holding that because the defendant did not at all times comply with the terms and conditions of his probation in this case, the district court did not have authority to reduce the defendant’s charge to a misdemeanor pursuant…”
State v. Hanes, 44 P.3d 295 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002). “[1] A defendant who has been convicted must seek the expungement of his conviction under I.C. § 19-2604. Schumacher notes that this is "an extraordinary remedy" which is denied to probationers who have been adjudicated to be in violation of the terms of their probation.”
State v. Mowrey, 9 P.3d 1217 (Idaho 2000). “The bill’s detailed statement of purpose explained that it was meant to amend I.C. § 19-2604 “so that there would be no allowable amendment of judgment afforded to offenders of certain crimes against children” — namely, I.”
State v. Perkins, 13 P.3d 344 (Idaho Ct. App. 2000). “1991), that a defendant who has received an order withholding judgment, and who is later discharged under § 19-2604, does not thereby escape from every possible consequence of the adjudication of guilt.”
Manners v. State, Bd. of Veterinary Med., 694 P.2d 1298 (Idaho 1985). “Manners asserts, however, that once a judgment of conviction is set aside under authority of I.C. § 19-2604, it is a nullity for all purposes unless specifically provided by statute to the contrary.”
State v. Deitz, 819 P.2d 1155 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991). “The question *1157 thus becomes whether the discharge provisions of I.C. § 19-2604, as carried out in the dismissal of Deitz's 1986 DUI conviction, nullified that conviction for the purposes of I.”
State v. Wiedmeier, 824 P.2d 120 (Idaho 1992). “is not available under Idaho Code § 19-2604 nor available under Idaho Code § 18-111 .”
State v. Charles Earl Guess, 300 P.3d 53 (Idaho 2013). “The prosecutor did not have the authority to enter into a plea agreement that would eliminate two of the three required findings that the district court must make when presented with a motion pursuant to section 19-2604 and that would eliminate the court’s right to exercise its…”
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(1) — 51 cases
State v. Robinson, 142 P.3d 729 (Idaho 2006). “It provides, in pertinent part: If sentence has been imposed but suspended, or if sentence has been withheld, upon application of the defendant and upon satisfactory showing that the defendant has at all times complied with the terms and conditions upon which he was placed on…”
State v. Samuel Thomas Glenn, 319 P.3d 1191 (Idaho 2014). “The district court had previously dismissed Glenn’s 2001 DUI conviction pursuant to I.C. § 19-2604. Glenn argues on appeal that the district court erred because Idaho Supreme Court precedent holds that cases dismissed pursuant to I.”
State v. Hanes, 44 P.3d 295 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002). “[1] A defendant who has been convicted must seek the expungement of his conviction under I.C. § 19-2604. Schumacher notes that this is "an extraordinary remedy" which is denied to probationers who have been adjudicated to be in violation of the terms of their probation.”
State v. Perkins, 13 P.3d 344 (Idaho Ct. App. 2000). “1991), that a defendant who has received an order withholding judgment, and who is later discharged under § 19-2604, does not thereby escape from every possible consequence of the adjudication of guilt.”
State v. Reed, 243 P.3d 1089 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(1)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Allen, 325 P.3d 673 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Ingraham (Idaho 2023).
State v. Ingraham (Idaho 2023).
State v. Ingraham (Idaho 2023).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(1)(a)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Harley Gomez, 392 P.3d 525 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Mercure (Idaho Ct. App. 2023).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(1)(b) — 5 cases
State v. Harley Gomez, 392 P.3d 525 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Meyer (Idaho Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Hanson (Idaho Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Mercure (Idaho Ct. App. 2023).
State v. Wagy (Idaho Ct. App. 2025).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(1)(b)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Harley Gomez, 392 P.3d 525 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Clapp (Idaho Ct. App. 2022).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(2) — 19 cases
Housley v. State, 811 P.2d 495 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991).
State v. Mowrey, 9 P.3d 1217 (Idaho 2000). “The bill’s detailed statement of purpose explained that it was meant to amend I.C. § 19-2604 “so that there would be no allowable amendment of judgment afforded to offenders of certain crimes against children” — namely, I.”
State v. Shock, 992 P.2d 202 (Idaho Ct. App. 1999).
Todd Rich v. State of Idaho, 364 P.3d 254 (Idaho 2015).
State v. Funk, 855 P.2d 52 (Idaho 1993).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Clapp (Idaho Ct. App. 2022).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(3) — 10 cases
State v. Mowrey, 9 P.3d 1217 (Idaho 2000). “The bill’s detailed statement of purpose explained that it was meant to amend I.C. § 19-2604 “so that there would be no allowable amendment of judgment afforded to offenders of certain crimes against children” — namely, I.”
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 354 P.3d 505 (Idaho Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Mowrey, 919 P.2d 333 (Idaho 1996).
State v. Dorn, 94 P.3d 709 (Idaho Ct. App. 2004). “After successfully completing probation, Dorn filed a motion to dismiss the case or amend his conviction pursuant to I.C. § 19-2604, which authorizes dismissal or reduction of some types of charges if a defendant has completed probation without violations.”
State v. Forbes, 275 P.3d 864 (Idaho 2012).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(3)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 354 P.3d 505 (Idaho Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 384 P.3d 413 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(3)(b) — 1 case
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 384 P.3d 413 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(3)(c)(i) — 1 case
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 384 P.3d 413 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(3)(c)(ix) — 1 case
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 384 P.3d 413 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(3)(d) — 1 case
State v. Scott Alan Moore, 384 P.3d 413 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(4) — 1 case
State v. Petersen, 241 P.3d 981 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(6) — 1 case
State v. Reed, 243 P.3d 1089 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(l)(b) — 1 case
State v. Harley Gomez, 392 P.3d 525 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).
— Idaho Code § 19-2604(l)(b)(i) — 1 case
State v. Harley Gomez, 392 P.3d 525 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).
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.