State v. Hernandez
- Decided
- December 10, 1991
- Docket
- 19098
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Idaho
Cited 2,575 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- defendant ordered to reimburse law énforcement agencies the amount of “purchase money” expended during investigation of narcotics violations — State v. Lewis (1998)
- allowing restitution for costs of narcotics investigation — United States v. Gibbens (1994)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*116] WALTERS, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from a district court order denying a motion for reduction of sentences imposed on the defendant’s convictions for delivery of controlled substances. We affirm.
Wenceslao Hernandez was charged with three counts of delivery of cocaine, I.C. § 37-2732(a)(l)(A). Pursuant to I.C.R. 11, he pled guilty to two counts and the state dismissed the third. Based upon this plea, the district court sentenced Hernandez on each count to ten years in the custody of the Idaho State Board of Correction, including mandatory terms of three years’ incarceration, and imposed a $1,000 fine. The court ordered that the sentences be served concurrently. The judgment of conviction was filed May 22, 1990. Additionally, the court ordered Hernandez to pay $10,000 restitution to the Idaho Bureau of Narcotics, the City-County Narcotics Unit and the Ada County Sheriff’s Office for investigative expenses incurred by those governmental agencies. The restitution order was filed May 25, 1990. Hernandez filed no direct appeal either from the judgment of conviction or from the restitution order.
Cite this
State v. Hernandez, 822 P.2d 1011 (1991)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.