Idaho Supreme Court· 7/20/1998

State v. Moore

Citations

965 P.2d 174
131 Idaho 814
1998 Ida. LEXIS 97

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

concluding that the admission of the State’s experts’ testimony that the victim had been sexually abused would not be reviewed on appeal in light of the failure to object at trial, as the erroneous admission of expert testimony is not subject to a fundamental error analysis
observing that a defendant’s sentence was reasonable based, in part, on his history of uncharged sexual abuse of minors
applying Bingham and concluding that the erroneous admission of expert testimony is not subject to fundamental error analysis
finding no error where the district court failed to give a limiting instruction when it admitted impeachment evidence because “there is nothing in [Rule 105] that requires the giving of a limiting instruction absent a request from [the defendant]
admitted evidence that defendant left Idaho for his home in Oregon to avoid a scheduled interview from an officer investigating lewd conduct
court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the objectives of punishment, deterrence and protection of society outweighed the need for rehabilitation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Trout, Silak, Johnson, Walters, Schroeder

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

100 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

43 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.