Parsons v. State

Idaho Court of Appeals

Parsons v. State

745 P.2d 308, 113 Idaho 429, 1987 Ida. App. LEXIS 463

CourtIdaho Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 21, 1987

DocketNo. 16673

StatusPublished

This text of 745 P.2d 308 (Parsons v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parsons v. State, 745 P.2d 308, 113 Idaho 429, 1987 Ida. App. LEXIS 463 (Idaho Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

SWANSTROM, Judge.

This is a companion case to Parsons v. State, 113 Idaho 421, 745 P.2d 300 (App.1987), which we have also decided today. Robert Parsons was cited for failure to renew his automobile registration. Judgment of conviction for the misdemeanor offense was entered against him. He appealed the conviction. While that appeal was pending, he made application for post-conviction relief. The matter was assigned to the magistrate division by the district judge. The magistrate summarily dismissed the application. Parsons’ appeal to the district court was dismissed as procedurally improper. He timely appealed the district court’s decision.

The facts, claims and issues raised in this case are identical to those raised by Bethea Parsons in her case. Our rulings in that case are controlling here. Accordingly, we join the district court in upholding the magistrate’s order of dismissal.

The district court order, having the effect of affirming the magistrate’s dismissal of the application for post-conviction relief, is affirmed.

WALTERS, C.J., and BURNETT, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SWANSTROM, Judge.

This is a companion case to Parsons v. State, 113 Idaho 421, 745 P.2d 300 (App.1987), which we have also decided today. Robert Parsons was cited for failure to renew his automobile registration. Judgment of conviction for the misdemeanor offense was entered against him. He appealed the conviction. While that appeal was pending, he made application for post-conviction relief. The matter was assigned to the magistrate division by the district judge. The magistrate summarily dismissed the application. Parsons’ appeal to the district court was dismissed as procedurally improper. He timely appealed the district court’s decision.

The facts, claims and issues raised in this case are identical to those raised by Bethea Parsons in her case. Our rulings in that case are controlling here. Accordingly, we join the district court in upholding the magistrate’s order of dismissal.

The district court order, having the effect of affirming the magistrate’s dismissal of the application for post-conviction relief, is affirmed.

WALTERS, C.J., and BURNETT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

745 P.2d 308, 113 Idaho 429, 1987 Ida. App. LEXIS 463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parsons-v-state-idahoctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack