Legal Opinion

State v. Canelo

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided October 17, 1996No. 21883PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALTERS, Chief Judge.

Jose R. Canelo was found guilty by a jury of delivery of a controlled substance, I.C. § 37-2732(a)(l)(A). On appeal, he claims that the trial court erred by: (1) denying his motion for a mistrial after the state failed to provide timely discovery of material evidence; (2) refusing to instruct the jury on the affirmative defenses of entrapment and duress; and (3) admitting evidence of other bad acts. For the reasons explained below, we affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Jose Canelo was indicted on one count of delivery of a controlled substance. I.C. §…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. State v. BowmanIdaho Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. State v. UrquhartIdaho Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. State v. AtkinsonIdaho Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. State v. RhoadesIdaho Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. BabbIdaho Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State v. SheahanIdaho Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. WhippleIdaho Court of Appeals · 2000
  3. State v. BarcellaIdaho Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. State v. ButcherIdaho Court of Appeals · 2002
  5. State v. PachecoIdaho Court of Appeals · 2000

17 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