State v. Hood
Idaho
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2026State of Idaho v. Sean Saldatore Hurst Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Owen Robert Seatz Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Brandon Lee Richards Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Nathaniel David Messick Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Drae Nicholas Pedroza Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Cody Allan Bussinger Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Nehemiah James William MacKenzie Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Jacob Eldon Gould Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Alice Nicole Dees Idaho Ct. App.
- 2026State of Idaho v. Brian Arthur Hodgson Idaho Ct. App.
Cites 2 cases
- State v. Bradac
- State v. Stroup
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Jefferson D. HOOD, Defendant-Appellant.
Attorneys
- G. LaMarr Kofoed, Fruitland, for defendant-appellant.
- David H. Leroy, Atty. Gen., Lynn E. Thomas, Sol. Gen., Myma A. I. Stahman, Deputy Atty. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.
The defendant appeals from a sentence of ten years for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. The assault occurred in conjunction with an escape from the Payette County jail in which the defendant and two other inmates threatened a deputy sheriff with the sharpened handle of a spoon and locked him in a cell and escaped from the jail.
The defendant pleaded guilty to the aggravated assault charge, and the court ordered a presentence investigation. The presentence investigation indicated that the defendant, eighteen years of age at the time of the assault, had a rather substantial record as a juvenile and that his attitude and outlook required institutionalization. The psychological report attached to the presentence investigation indicated that the defendant was potentially dangerous to society.
The court sentenced the defendant to an indeterminate term for not to exceed ten years, retaining jurisdiction for 120 days. Upon receiving the report from the Board of Corrections, the court held a hearing on whether or not the court should exercise its retained jurisdiction and grant probation. The defendant was present and testified. Following the hearing, the court concluded that the defendant’s anti-social attitude had not been adequately corrected and that the protection of society required that he not be released on probation at that time. Accordingly, the court ordered that the retained jurisdiction be relinquished and the defendant remanded to the custody of the Idaho State Board of Corrections to serve the balance of the sentence.
The defendant has appealed, asserting that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to exercise its retained jurisdiction to modify the original sentence and place the defendant on probation. We have reviewed the record and conclude that no abuse of discretion is disclosed, and therefore we affirm the judgment of the trial court. State v. Bradac, 101 Idaho 240, 611 P.2d 1025 (1980); State v. Stroup, 101 Idaho 54, 607 P.2d 1328 (1980).
Judgment affirmed.