State v. Hoffman
| Citation | 754 P.2d 452,114 Idaho 139 |
| Decision Date | 28 April 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 17066,17066 |
| Parties | STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Dale P. HOFFMAN, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Idaho Court of Appeals |
Alan E. Trimming, Public Defender, Lansing L. Haynes, Deputy Public Defender, Boise, for defendant-appellant.
Jim Jones, Atty. Gen., David R. Minert, Deputy Atty. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.
Dale Hoffman absconded from the Ada County jail where he was being held for sentencing on a robbery conviction. Following his apprehension, he pled guilty to escape by one charged with a felony. He received a sentence of five years, indeterminate, to be served consecutively to the sentence imposed for the robbery. I.C. §§ 18-9505; 18-112. He subsequently filed a motion, under I.C.R. 35, for reconsideration of the five-year sentence for the escape. He requested that the sentence be suspended. Hoffman's motion was denied without a hearing. On appeal, Hoffman states the following, single issue: "whether the district court abused its discretion in denying defendant's motion for reconsideration of sentence without affording defendant a hearing on that motion."
We affirm the order of the district court denying Hoffman's motion for the following reasons. The judgment of conviction for the escape offense was filed on December 23, 1986. Hoffman's Rule 35 motion was filed on April 29, 1987, 127 days later. Rule 35 allows a period of 120 days to file a motion to reduce a sentence after the sentence is imposed. Since Hoffman's motion was not filed within the allowed time-frame, the district court was without jurisdiction to grant any relief under Rule 35. State v. Parrish, 110 Idaho 599, 716 P.2d 1371 (Ct.App.1986).
We do note that Hoffman also filed, simultaneously with his Rule 35 motion, a motion for extension of time to file the Rule 35 motion. Apparently the court never ruled on on the extension motion. However, I.C.R. 45(b)(3) provides that "the court may not extend the time for taking any action under [Rule] 35 ... except to the extent and under the condition stated therein." We do not find in Rule 35 any provision for an exception or condition to the requirement of filing a motion within the 120-day period.
In Parrish we observed that a defendant may be excused from timely filing a Rule 35 motion under special circumstances or because of misleading conduct by the government. We do not find in the record of this case any special circumstances or misleading conduct on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Corder
...an exception to the jurisdictional time limits of Rule 35. We reached the same conclusion in a subsequent case, State v. Hoffman, 114 Idaho 139, 754 P.2d 452 (Ct.App.1988). In the instant case, however, we conclude that application of such an exception is warranted upon the facts presented.......
-
State v. Rose
... ... "extend the time to take any action" under I.C.R ... 35 "except to the extent and under the condition ... stated" in that rule. I.C.R. 45(b)(2). For this reason, ... any stay granted pursuant to I.C.R. 38 could not extend the ... 120-day period. See State v. Hoffman, 114 Idaho 139, ... 140, 754 P.2d 452, 453 (Ct. App. 1988) (noting that nothing ... in I.C.R. 35(b) provides an exception or condition to the ... requirement of filing a motion within the 120-day period) ... Consequently, the district court erred by concluding that the ... ...
-
Munson v. State
...of limitations in the present case. The district court relied upon the Idaho Court of Appeals holding in State v. Hoffman, 114 Idaho 139, 140, 754 P.2d 452, 453 (Ct.App.1988), for its conclusion that the mailbox rule did not apply to the filing of a petition for post-conviction relief. In H......
-
State v. Smith
...which to file a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence may not be enlarged.2 Cf. State v. Hoffman, 114 Idaho 139, 140, 754 P.2d 452, 453 (Ct.App.1988) (holding I.C.R. 35 does not provide for enlargement of time to file motion within 120 days and thus, time to file......