State v. Butler

Decision Date30 September 1992
Docket NumberNo. 19727,19727
Citation122 Idaho 776,839 P.2d 43
PartiesSTATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Max BUTLER, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtIdaho Court of Appeals

Alan E. Trimming, Ada County Public Defender, Boise, for defendant-appellant.

Larry J. EchoHawk, Atty. Gen., Kevin P. Cassidy, Deputy Atty. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Max Butler was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault for an incident in which he choked his girlfriend. The district court sentenced Butler to a five-year fixed sentence and retained jurisdiction. After a hearing the court relinquished jurisdiction and reduced the sentence to five years with two years' fixed period of confinement. Butler appeals from the order relinquishing jurisdiction, and we affirm.

As this Court stated in State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 786 P.2d 594 (Ct.App.1990):

The purpose of retaining jurisdiction after imposing a sentence is to afford the trial court additional time for evaluation of the defendant's rehabilitation potential and suitability for probation. The decision to place a defendant on probation or whether, instead, to release jurisdiction over the defendant is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court. Absent an abuse of that discretion, the trial court's decision will be sustained.

Lee, 117 Idaho at 205-206, 786 P.2d at 597-598 (citations omitted).

The district court held a hearing to consider whether to relinquish jurisdiction. Prior to the hearing the court had considered the recommendation of the Department of Corrections recommending relinquishing jurisdiction. Although the Department had initially recommended probation, after a rebuttal hearing, that recommendation was reversed at the urging of the warden because of improper staffing of the committee which had issued the report after the rebuttal hearing. Additionally, the committee which had made the probation recommendation was unaware that Butler had been charged with attempting to run over his former girlfriend and a companion, after he had been released on his own recognizance while awaiting trial. The district court also considered Butler's PSI before determining to relinquish jurisdiction.

In making its decision to relinquish jurisdiction, the district court noted the necessity to protect society from the risk of harm to himself and to others posed by Butler's violent behavior. The district court rejected Butler's probation plan which did not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Braaten
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Idaho
    • August 8, 2007
    ...indigence, the order relinquishing jurisdiction is affirmed. Chief Judge PERRY and Judge GUTIERREZ concur. 1. In State v. Butler, 122 Idaho 776, 839 P.2d 43 (Ct.App.1992), we found no error where a district court considered the defendant's financial condition when deciding between probation......
  • State v. Lutes, 30487.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • September 13, 2005
    ...to place a defendant on probation or relinquish jurisdiction is a matter within the trial court's discretion. State v. Butler, 122 Idaho 776, 776, 839 P.2d 43, 43 (Ct.App.1992). Absent an abuse of that discretion, the trial court's decision to relinquish jurisdiction will not be overturned.......
  • Butler v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • April 1, 1997
    ...for review of the Idaho Court of Appeal's decision which affirmed the district court's November 20, 1991 order. See State v. Butler, 122 Idaho 776, 839 P.2d 43 (Ct.App.1992). Butler filed a petition for post-conviction relief pursuant to the Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure Act, I.C. §§ 19......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT