144 Idaho 82 - State v. Phillips

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably State v. Severson (2009), State v. Adamcik (2012)

47 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Judge Pro Tern SCHWARTZMAN,

¶1specially concurring.

¶2I concur in the opinion of this Court despite the fact that I feel the conventional application of harmless error standards would not necessarily mandate reversal. This case represents yet another in a long line or pattern of repetitious misconduct from this prosecutorial office. A catalogue of cases in which the doctrine of “harmless error” has reared its head and saved the conviction on appeal creates a less than enviable appellate track record. See State v. Vandenacre, 131 Idaho 507, 960 P.2d 190 (Ct.App.1998); State v. Brown, 131 Idaho 61, 951 P.2d 1288 (Ct.App.1998); State v. Lovelass, 133 Idaho 160, 983 P.2d 233 (Ct.App.1999); State v. Cortez, 135 Idaho 561, 21 P.3d 498 (Ct.App.2001); State v. Kuhn, 139 Idaho 710, 85 P.3d 1109 (Ct.App.2003). Two unpublished opinions also come readily to mind: State v. Blythe, Docket No. 25557, 135 Idaho 493, 20 P.3d 29, 2000 WL 1344686 (Ct.App. April 7, 2000), and State v. Gadberry, Docket No. 26604/26605 (Ct.App. Sept. 26, 2001). As our own Supreme Court has noted in State v. Guzman, 122 Idaho 981, 984 n. 1, 842 P.2d 660, 663 n. 1 (1992):

Mistakes must not become the practice instead of the exception. A court on observing that a pattern of mistakes has developed, on seeing yet another “mistake,” might readily decide to view such circumstance with a jaundiced eye, and rule accordingly.

¶3Accordingly, I too vote to overturn this conviction.