Idaho Code § 19-2827
Review of death sentences — Preservation of records.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Review of death sentences — Preservation of records.
(a) Whenever the death penalty is imposed, and upon the judgment becoming final in the trial court, the sentence shall be reviewed on the record by the supreme court of Idaho. The clerk of the trial court, within ten (10) days after receiving the transcript, shall transmit the entire record and transcript to the supreme court of Idaho and to the attorney general together with a notice prepared by the clerk and, if a jury has been waived for sentencing, a report prepared by the trial judge setting forth the findings required by section 19-2515(8)(b), Idaho Code, and such other matters concerning the sentence imposed as may be required by the supreme court. The notice shall set forth the title and docket number of the case, the name of the defendant and the name and address of his attorney(s), a narrative statement of the judgment, the offense, and punishment prescribed. The report may be in the form of a standard questionnaire prepared and supplied by the supreme court of Idaho.
(b) The supreme court of Idaho shall consider the punishment as well as any errors enumerated by way of appeal.
(c) With regard to the sentence the court shall determine:
(1) Whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor; and
(2) Whether the evidence supports the jury’s or judge’s finding of a statutory aggravating circumstance from among those enumerated in section 19-2515, Idaho Code.
(d) Both the defendant and the state shall have the right to submit briefs within the time provided by the court, and to present oral argument to the court.
(e) In addition to its authority regarding correction of errors, the court, with regard to review of death sentences, shall be authorized to:
(1) Affirm the sentence of death; or
(2) Set the sentence aside and remand the case for resentencing by a jury or, if waived, the trial judge.
(f) The sentence review shall be in addition to direct appeal, if taken, and the review and appeal shall be consolidated for consideration.
(g) The supreme court shall collect and preserve the records of all cases in which the penalty of death was imposed from and including the year 1975.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 69
cases, 1979–2018 · leading case: State v. Card
State v. Card (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant.”
State v. Osborn (1981)
“The matter is before us on a dual basis: under the mandatory review procedure set forth in I.C. § 19-2827 and under the appeal brought by appellant.”
State v. Sivak (1983)
“[1] Our review is not only in response to the appeal, but also pursuant to automatic review of death sentences mandated by I.C. § 19-2827. [2] *398 On April 6, 1981, Dixie Wilson, an attendant at a self service gas station, was discovered near death by a customer.”
State v. Timothy Alan Dunlap (2013)
“Additionally, the parties ask this Court to determine whether the mandatory review of death sentences governed by Idaho Code § 19-2827 requires the Court to consider errors that were not preserved by objection at trial or whether a defendant must demonstrate fundamental error…”
State v. Rhoades (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant." Our perusal of the…”
State v. Erik Virgil Hall (2018)
“Hall argues that the plain language of Idaho Code section 19-2827 requires that the Supreme Court consider all errors at sentencing, including those that were not objected to by defendant and have not been raised by defendant on appeal.”
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
State v. Pizzuto (1991)
“Idaho Code § 19-2827 . In doing so, it is our duty to insure (1) that the death sentence was not imposed under the influence of passion or prejudice; (2) that the evidence supports the judge's finding of statutory aggravating circumstances; and (3) that when both the crime and…”
State v. Creech (1983)
“The cause is before this Court pursuant to the provisions of I.C. § 19-2827, "Whenever the death penalty is imposed, and upon the judgment becoming final in the trial court, the sentence shall be reviewed on the record by the Supreme Court of Idaho," and also upon an appeal…”
State v. Payne (2008)
“Idaho Code § 19-2827 provides, in part: (b) The Supreme Court of Idaho shall consider the punishment as well as any errors enumerated by way of appeal.”
State v. Osborn (1983)
“Additionally, being required under I.C. § 19-2827 to undertake an appellate review independent of any alleged errors raised on appeal, we note our awareness of that review, although it is clear the actual statutory review in regard to the present *1123 case awaits resentencing…”
State v. Wood (1998)
“Death is clearly a different kind of punishment from any other that may be imposed, and I.C. § 19-2827 mandates that we examine not only the sentence but the procedure followed in imposing that sentence regardless of whether an appeal is even taken.”
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(a) — 9 cases
State v. Card (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant.”
State v. Scroggins (1986)
State v. Rhoades (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant." Our perusal of the…”
State v. Gibson (1983)
State v. Sivak (1983)
“[1] Our review is not only in response to the appeal, but also pursuant to automatic review of death sentences mandated by I.C. § 19-2827. [2] *398 On April 6, 1981, Dixie Wilson, an attendant at a self service gas station, was discovered near death by a customer.”
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(b) — 5 cases
State v. Payne (2008)
“Idaho Code § 19-2827 provides, in part: (b) The Supreme Court of Idaho shall consider the punishment as well as any errors enumerated by way of appeal.”
State v. Timothy Alan Dunlap (2013)
“Additionally, the parties ask this Court to determine whether the mandatory review of death sentences governed by Idaho Code § 19-2827 requires the Court to consider errors that were not preserved by objection at trial or whether a defendant must demonstrate fundamental error…”
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
State v. Timothy Alan Dunlap (2013)
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(c) — 10 cases
State v. Wood (1998)
“Death is clearly a different kind of punishment from any other that may be imposed, and I.C. § 19-2827 mandates that we examine not only the sentence but the procedure followed in imposing that sentence regardless of whether an appeal is even taken.”
State v. Card (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant.”
State v. Porter (1997)
State v. Hairston (1999)
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(c)(1) — 4 cases
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
State v. Hoffman (1993)
State v. Lankford (1989)
State v. Paradis (1983)
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(c)(2) — 3 cases
State v. Sivak (1983)
“[1] Our review is not only in response to the appeal, but also pursuant to automatic review of death sentences mandated by I.C. § 19-2827. [2] *398 On April 6, 1981, Dixie Wilson, an attendant at a self service gas station, was discovered near death by a customer.”
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
State v. Leavitt (1991)
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(c)(3) — 19 cases
State v. Card (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant.”
State v. Rhoades (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant." Our perusal of the…”
State v. Fields (1995)
State v. Pizzuto (1991)
“Idaho Code § 19-2827 . In doing so, it is our duty to insure (1) that the death sentence was not imposed under the influence of passion or prejudice; (2) that the evidence supports the judge's finding of statutory aggravating circumstances; and (3) that when both the crime and…”
State v. Sivak (1983)
“[1] Our review is not only in response to the appeal, but also pursuant to automatic review of death sentences mandated by I.C. § 19-2827. [2] *398 On April 6, 1981, Dixie Wilson, an attendant at a self service gas station, was discovered near death by a customer.”
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(c)(l) — 4 cases
State v. Lankford (1989)
State v. Paradis (1983)
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
McKinney v. State (1999)
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(e) — 4 cases
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
State v. Osborn (1983)
“Additionally, being required under I.C. § 19-2827 to undertake an appellate review independent of any alleged errors raised on appeal, we note our awareness of that review, although it is clear the actual statutory review in regard to the present *1123 case awaits resentencing…”
State v. Wood (1998)
“Death is clearly a different kind of punishment from any other that may be imposed, and I.C. § 19-2827 mandates that we examine not only the sentence but the procedure followed in imposing that sentence regardless of whether an appeal is even taken.”
State v. Hairston (1999)
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(e)(1) — 1 case
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(e)(2) — 3 cases
State v. Osborn (1981)
“The matter is before us on a dual basis: under the mandatory review procedure set forth in I.C. § 19-2827 and under the appeal brought by appellant.”
State v. Osborn (1983)
“Additionally, being required under I.C. § 19-2827 to undertake an appellate review independent of any alleged errors raised on appeal, we note our awareness of that review, although it is clear the actual statutory review in regard to the present *1123 case awaits resentencing…”
State v. Pratt (1993)
“Automatic review pursuant to I.C. § 19-2827. ANALYSIS I. The record reveals that at a preliminary hearing dated January 24, 1989, Pratt's court-appointed counsel [7] notified the court that Pratt did not want a public defender, that his family had retained private counsel from…”
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(e)(3) — 3 cases
State v. Pizzuto (1991)
“Idaho Code § 19-2827 . In doing so, it is our duty to insure (1) that the death sentence was not imposed under the influence of passion or prejudice; (2) that the evidence supports the judge's finding of statutory aggravating circumstances; and (3) that when both the crime and…”
State v. Card (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant.”
State v. Sivak (1995)
— Idaho Code § 19-2827(g) — 5 cases
State v. Creech (1983)
“The cause is before this Court pursuant to the provisions of I.C. § 19-2827, "Whenever the death penalty is imposed, and upon the judgment becoming final in the trial court, the sentence shall be reviewed on the record by the Supreme Court of Idaho," and also upon an appeal…”
State v. Card (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant.”
State v. Sivak (1983)
“[1] Our review is not only in response to the appeal, but also pursuant to automatic review of death sentences mandated by I.C. § 19-2827. [2] *398 On April 6, 1981, Dixie Wilson, an attendant at a self service gas station, was discovered near death by a customer.”
State v. Rhoades (1991)
“PROPORTIONALITY Idaho Code § 19-2827 (c)(3) requires this Court to determine in each capital case, "whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant." Our perusal of the…”
State v. Osborn (1983)
“Additionally, being required under I.C. § 19-2827 to undertake an appellate review independent of any alleged errors raised on appeal, we note our awareness of that review, although it is clear the actual statutory review in regard to the present *1123 case awaits resentencing…”
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.