Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Wally Kay Schultz v. State

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided November 2, 2015No. 42095Published

1Concurrence

Judge Pro Tem SCHWARTZMAN,

also specially concurring.

I write separately to highlight some of the legal incongruities and ironies associated with this case. Because of a three-day lag between the trial court’s “Temporary Order on Rider Review” and its subsequent “Order Upon 180-Day Review Hearing,” trial counsel missed the forty-two-day appellate filing deadline by three days. Such a mistake is at least “understandable” given the peculiar and somewhat unique rider review orders following upon each other over a three-day period. As a result, the Court of Appeals has had FOUR appeals by Schultz,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Schultz v. StateIdaho Court of Appeals · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API