State v. Hoisington
Idaho Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBistline, J.
Although I concur in that portion of the Court’s opinion which affirms the appellant’s conviction in the O’Connor case, I do not join in the remainder of the opinion. The appellant’s conviction in the Boyd case should be reversed, primarily on the ground that it was prejudicial error for the trial court to allow the court reporter to testify on rebuttal as to the incriminating statement which she allegedly heard the appellant make to his counsel during the preliminary hearing.
As in the recent case of State v. Olsen, 103 Idaho 278, 286-287, 647 P.2d 734, 742-43 (1982) (Bistline, J.,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- State v. LePageIdaho Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. SmootIdaho Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. OlsenIdaho Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. GarciaIdaho Supreme Court · 1979
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.