Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 9-312 (2026)

Authentication of judicial record. 

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

Authentication of judicial record. 

A judicial record of this state, or of the United States, may be proved by the production of the original, or by a copy thereof, certified by the clerk or other person having the legal custody thereof. That of another state or territory may be proved by the attestation of the clerk and the seal of the court annexed, if there be a clerk and seal, together with a certificate of the chief judge or presiding magistrate, that the attestation is in due form.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1948–2011 · leading case: State v. Howard, 248 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Howard, 248 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2011). · cites it 200× “The district court explained: "If admissibility under the Idaho Rules of Evidence were the end of the inquiry, Howard would be guilty of [the felony DUI enhancement], due to the admission of [the two judgments of conviction].”
State v. TOYNE, 264 P.3d 418 (Idaho Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 22× “902(4), It Need Not Also Comply with the Provisions of Idaho Code § 9-312 to be Admissible Toyne was charged with DUI for conduct on June 21, 2007, elevated to a felony because he had previously been convicted of felony DUI within the past fifteen years.”
State v. Martinez, 643 P.2d 555 (Idaho Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 8× “Exhibit 68 complied with Idaho’s requirement for proper authentication of a judicial record, I.C. § 9-312, and it was admitted without objection.”
Whitworth v. Krueger, 558 P.2d 1026 (Idaho 1976). · cites it 4× “Section 9-312, Comment 3, discusses this outcome and policy behind it at length.”
Smith v. Smith, 511 P.2d 294 (Idaho 1973). · cites it 6× “Both Exhibit 47 and any other testimony from other trials should have been authenticated according to I.C. § 9-312. 13 Copies of testimony taken by other courts come within the scope of I.”
State v. Johnson, 383 P.2d 326 (Idaho 1963). · cites it 3× “That of another state or territory may be proved by the attestation of the clerk and the seal of the court annexed, if there be a clerk and seal, together with a certificate of the chief judge or presiding magistrate, that the attestation is in due form.” Upon retrial of this…”
Olson v. Bedke, 555 P.2d 156 (Idaho 1976). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 9-312; Fairchild v. Wiggins, 85 Idaho 402 , 380 P.”
Stafford v. Field, 218 P.2d 338 (Idaho 1950). · cites it 2× “The official minutes of that proceeding, both appellant and respondents being represented by counsel, and the order properly certified (Section 9-312, I.C.) April 16, 1949, by H.”
Curry Grain Storage, Inc. v. Hesston Corp., 815 P.2d 1068 (Idaho 1991). · cites it 2× “Thus the special priority granted to statutory liens by Section 9-310 does not apply to liens under subsection (1) of this section, since subsection (3) “expressly provides otherwise” within the meaning of Section 9-310. We must then turn to the question whether Hesston so…”
Rockwell Int'l Credit Corp. v. Valley Bank, 707 P.2d 517 (Idaho Ct. App. 1985). “§ 9-312(4). But when collateral moves across state lines, it puts security interests at risk.”
Cuoio v. Koseris, 200 P.2d 359 (Idaho 1948). “Judgment is, therefore, reversed and the cause remanded with instructions to reinstate the default and upon proper proof, Sections 9-312, 9-316, 9-317, I.C.A., Gustin v.”
Valley Bank v. Est. of Rainsdon, 793 P.2d 1257 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 3× “Badger is a case following the general rule that under § 9-312(4) “possession” not the date of sale, is the determinative factor.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Idaho Code § 9-312(4) — 2 cases
Rockwell Int'l Credit Corp. v. Valley Bank, 707 P.2d 517 (Idaho Ct. App. 1985). “§ 9-312(4). But when collateral moves across state lines, it puts security interests at risk.”
Valley Bank v. Est. of Rainsdon, 793 P.2d 1257 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). “Badger is a case following the general rule that under § 9-312(4) “possession” not the date of sale, is the determinative factor.”
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.