State v. Folk
SimpleOriginal

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court vacated a conviction, holding that restrictions on a pro se defendant’s cross-examination of a child witness were unsupported because no evidence showed the defendant’s voice would traumatize the child.

2011 | State Juristiction

State v. Folk

Keywords pro se defendant; cross-examination; child witness; traumatize child
Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court overturned a conviction. This decision came because the limitations placed on a defendant, who was representing themselves, during the cross-examination of a child witness were not justified. There was no evidence to suggest that the defendant's voice would cause trauma to the child.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court recently overturned a conviction. This decision came after the Court found that limitations placed on a defendant, who was representing themselves, during the cross-examination of a child witness were not justified. There was no evidence to suggest that the sound of the defendant's voice would cause trauma to the child.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court recently overturned a conviction. This decision was based on the finding that a defendant, representing themselves in court, had their ability to question a child witness unfairly limited. There was no proof that the sound of the defendant's voice would cause the child emotional harm.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court overturned a court decision. The ruling stated that a person representing themselves in court was not allowed to question a child witness enough. The higher court found no proof that the sound of the person's voice would upset the child.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

State v. Folk, 151 Idaho 327, 256 P.3d 735 (2011)

Highlights