[DOWNLOAD] "State Idaho v. Ray Hernandez" by Supreme Court of Idaho No. 14190 # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State Idaho v. Ray Hernandez
- Author : Supreme Court of Idaho No. 14190
- Release Date : January 26, 1983
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 58 KB
Description
The defendant, Ray Hernandez, in a two-count information was charged, by Count I, that he did willfully, knowingly, wrongfully, unlawfully, intentionally and feloniously force [a female, mention of whose name would serve no purpose] to commit fellatio, and by Count II, that he did willfully, knowingly, wrongfully, unlawfully, intentionally and feloniously assault [that female] with the intent to commit the infamous crime against nature by threatening her with bodily harm and molesting her. Hernandez moved to dismiss the information on the basis that the statute under which he was charged, I.C. § 18-6605,[Footnote 1] was unconstitutional. That motion was denied by Judge Cogswell on the basis of State v. Carringer, 95 Idaho 929, 523 P.2d 532 (1974), in which it was held that I.C. § 18-6605 was not unconstitutionally vague as applied in that case where there was evidence of a forcible commission of a crime against nature, the details of which are readily available in the reported opinion. The original information was superseded by an amended information which alleged merely a violation of the statute without the involvement of either force or threats charging simply a consensual act between the defendant and the female. The female has not been charged with such a violation. No constitutional challenge was made to the amended information, which superseded and rendered functus officio the first information. Simultaneously with the filing of the amended information, a NEGOTIATED PLEA AGREEMENT was filed, signed by counsel for both parties, whereunder the defendant agreed that he would plead guilty to the amended information and the State agreed it would recommend to the court that the defendant be placed on unsupervised probation for a period of two years and also recommend that the defendant be given a withheld judgment. In addition, and giving rise to this appeal, the prosecutor stipulated that the defendant in entering his plea did not waive his right to appeal and on the appeal challenge the constitutionality of the statute, I.C. § 18-6605.