State v. Goodrich
| Decision Date | 03 August 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 13558,13558 |
| Citation | 103 Idaho 430,649 P.2d 389 |
| Parties | STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jean GOODRICH, aka Jeannie Goodrich, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | Idaho Court of Appeals |
David H. Leroy, Atty. Gen., Lynn E. Thomas, Sol. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-appellant.
William G. Walker, Tucson, Ariz., R. Don Bistline, Pocatello, for defendant-respondent.
This is an appeal by the state from an order denying a motion to dismiss an application for post-conviction relief. The motion also requested setting aside an earlier order granting post-conviction relief. We affirm the order denying the motion.
Jean Goodrich was found guilty of second degree murder, but her judgment of conviction was reversed by the Idaho Supreme Court. State v. Goodrich, 97 Idaho 472, 546 P.2d 1180 (1976). A retrial was commenced. After the state had presented part of its case, Goodrich changed her plea to guilty. Pursuant to an apparent plea bargain, she was sentenced to custody of the Board of Corrections for an indeterminate period not exceeding ten years.
After serving approximately two years of her sentence, she filed a "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus," requesting the district court to set aside the guilty plea because it was entered involuntarily and in violation of her constitutional rights. The case was assigned to a judge who had not been involved in any of the previous proceedings concerning Goodrich. Upon application of the state, the judge examined the petition and held that it should be treated as an application for post-conviction relief. See I.C. §§ 19-4901-19-4911.
The district court determined that Goodrich's plea had not been made freely, voluntarily or with knowledge of the consequences attending the plea. Her application for post-conviction relief was granted, and her guilty plea was set aside. She subsequently reinstated her former plea of not guilty, and was released on bond pending another trial.
The state filed a motion to set aside the district court's order granting relief, and to dismiss the application for post-conviction relief. This motion merely questioned the validity of the application because it did not contain a verification as required by I.C. § 19-4902. The district court held the verification to be unnecessary because Goodrich's application relied solely upon certified transcripts of prior court proceedings. The court then denied the motion to dismiss. Rather than proceeding with a new trial, the state filed this appeal.
I.A.R. 17(e) requires that a notice of appeal contain "a designation of the judgment, order or decree appealed from." The state filed a notice of appeal, followed by an amended notice. Both notices designated only that the appeal was taken from the district court order denying the state's motion-made after the application for post-conviction relief had been granted-to dismiss the application for lack of verification. In its argument on appeal, the state has invited this court also to review the order also, of the district court granting post-conviction relief. We decline to do so. An appeal from a final judgment or order-i.e., a judgment or order dispositive of a case, Idah-Best, Inc. v. First Security Bank, 99 Idaho 517, 584 P.2d 1242 (1978)-allows review of other orders which are either interlocutory, or entered after the appeal was filed. I.A.R. 17(e). Here the order granting post-conviction relief was neither interlocutory nor entered after the appeal was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Goodrich
...to the Idaho Court of Appeals. That court affirmed the district court in an opinion issued August 3, 1982, State v. Goodrich, 103 Idaho 430, 649 P.2d 389 (Ct.App.1982). This Court granted a petition to review the Court of Appeals decision. We On October 17, 1973, respondent shot and killed ......