Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Griffith

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1980No. 12842Published

1DissentBakes, Justice

After reviewing the record made at the preliminary hearing, it is my conclusion that the magistrate did not abuse his discretion in binding the defendant over to district court for trial on the charge of grand larceny. I must also express my disagreement with the majority’s comments regarding the degree of specificity required in the magistrate’s decision to bind the defendant over for trial and the deference this Court must give the district court’s review of the magistrate’s action in binding the defendant over for trial.

At the preliminary hearing, the state is not required to prove the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Lane — Real Estate Department Store, Inc. v. Lawlet Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
  2. Carey v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Union Oil Co. of California v. Department of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Kupkowski v. Avis Ford, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Voss v. Kingdon and Naven, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1975

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API