State v. Hodges

653 P.2d 1177, 103 Idaho 765, 1982 Ida. LEXIS 302
CourtIdaho Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 12, 1982
Docket14136
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 653 P.2d 1177 (State v. Hodges) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Hodges, 653 P.2d 1177, 103 Idaho 765, 1982 Ida. LEXIS 302 (Idaho 1982).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The state brings this appeal to test whether, after assigning rights to child support to the state, an ex-wife can then bind the state by a release to her ex-husband from all obligations for past due child support. Unfortunately, however, the record is insufficient for this Court to decide the case. This Court is bound by the record presented upon appeal. Neer v. Safeway Stores, 92 Idaho 361, 442 P.2d 771 (1968). See also, Lisher v. City and/or Village of Potlatch, 101 Idaho 343, 612 P.2d 1190 (1980).

In the present case there are no minutes indicating what occurred at the trial court level; there is no reporter’s transcript indicating what testimony was taken. The appellant has the initial burden of presenting a record sufficient to enable an appellate court to decide the case. Appellant has not met this burden, with no explanation why an adequate record has not been prepared. If the record was defective through no fault of appellant, the situation might be viewed differently. However, no adequate showing has been made which ex *766 cuses the appellant from presenting an adequate record on appeal so that this Court can properly evaluate the claimed errors.

Appellant and respondent have attempted to present the facts which were elicited at the hearing of this case to this Court by way of post-trial affidavits of counsel, a clearly unacceptable procedure. See Bradford v. Simpson, 97 Idaho 188, 541 P.2d 612 (1975); Annau v. Schutte, 96 Idaho 704, 535 P.2d 1095 (1975). In the absence of an adequate record, or a sufficient reason for the failure to produce a record, we affirm the trial court.

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

Related

Cobbley v. City of Challis
59 P.3d 959 (Idaho Supreme Court, 2002)
State v. Barros
957 P.2d 1095 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1998)
State v. Maland
861 P.2d 107 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1993)
Lake v. State
858 P.2d 798 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1993)
Chenoweth v. Sanger
846 P.2d 191 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1993)
State v. Garner
834 P.2d 888 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1992)
Bondy v. Levy
829 P.2d 1342 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1992)
State v. Hardman
828 P.2d 902 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1992)
State Ex Rel. Ohman v. Ivan H. Talbot Family Trust
820 P.2d 695 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1991)
Brooks v. Brooks
805 P.2d 481 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1990)
Golay v. Loomis
797 P.2d 95 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1990)
Bernard v. Roby
733 P.2d 804 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1987)
Anderson v. City of Pocatello
731 P.2d 171 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1987)
Goodwin v. Wulfenstein
690 P.2d 947 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
653 P.2d 1177, 103 Idaho 765, 1982 Ida. LEXIS 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hodges-idaho-1982.