Leavitt v. Arave

I concur in the per curiam opinion, but as to parts I and IV, I do so for somewhat different reasons.1

I. THE INNOCENCE INSTR UCTION

The Idaho trial court gave numerous instructions on the state’s burden of persuasion,2 and, while it was at it, gave an instruction on the presumption of innocence, which Leavitt neither objected to nor presented as a separate issue to the Idaho Supreme Court.3 That instruction read as follows:

The rule of law which clothes every person accused of a crime with the presumption of innocence and imposes upon the State the burden of proving his guilt beyond a…