State v. Toohill
- Decided
- September 8, 1982
- Docket
- 13900
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Idaho
Cited 3,704 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that the primary consideration in sentencing is the protection of society, and all other factors must be subservient to that end — State v. Pamela Denise Pringle (2014)
- “[The Idaho] Supreme Court has articulated four objectives of criminal punishment: (1) protection of society, (2) deterrence of the individual and the public generally, (3) possibility of rehabilitation, and (4) punishment or retribution for wrongdoing.” — State v. Ish (2024)
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
BURNETT, Judge.
This is an appeal from a sentence imposed for second degree burglary. We are asked to review (1) the adequacy of the presentence report, (2) the district court’s refusal to retain jurisdiction for 120 days, and (3) the reasonableness of a five-year, indeterminate term. Issues of this type frequently arise in criminal cases assigned to the Court of Appeals. In this opinion, we state our general views on standards of appellate review of such issues; and we affirm the particular sentence imposed in this case.
I
Cite this
State v. Toohill, 650 P.2d 707 (1982)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.