Court Opinion

ID: 9542882
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:39:53.952639+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:09:09.523787
License: Public Domain

SWANSTROM, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur specially in part I of this opinion to emphasize that this Court has not decided today whether a guilty verdict must be set aside if it is inconsistent with a not guilty verdict on a separate but related charge. Neither did we decide this question in State v. Crawford, 104 Idaho 840, 633 P.2d 1142 (Ct.App.1983). Today, as in Crawford, we simply do not reach the question. Our opinion also mentions a case decided by our Supreme Court, State v. Garcia, 102 Idaho 378, 630 P.2d 665 (1981). The Court in Garcia likewise did not need to decide the effect of inconsistent verdicts and the Court expressly reserved that question for a later day. It should be noted that both Garcia and Crawford were decided before the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed Dunn in United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57, 105 S.Ct. 471, 83 L.Ed.2d 461 (1984).