State v. Slinkard

Summary

The Idaho Court of Appeals affirmed Cordelle Anthony Jameson Slinkard’s convictions for five counts of unlawful possession of a firearm. The court held that a felony forgery conviction resulting in supervised probation qualifies as a prior felony conviction under Idaho Code § 18-3316, even though forgery is not among the specifically listed offenses in § 18-310(2). The court also affirmed the denial of Slinkard’s Idaho Criminal Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal.

Holdings

1. A defendant who received a withheld judgment for felony forgery and was on supervised felony probation is 'convicted of a felony' for purposes of Idaho Code section 18-3316, and is prohibited from possessing firearms until final discharge and restoration of firearm rights.
2. The reference to crimes enumerated in Idaho Code section 18-310 encompasses the entire statute, not merely the specifically listed offenses in section 18-310(2).
3. The district court properly denied Slinkard's motion for judgment of acquittal because the record contained sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that he was a convicted felon unlawfully possessing firearms.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant on supervised probation following a withheld judgment for felony forgery is a person previously convicted of a felony under Idaho Code section 18-3316.
2. Whether Idaho Code section 18-3316's reference to crimes enumerated in Idaho Code section 18-310 is limited to the specifically listed offenses in section 18-310(2), or encompasses the general category of felonies addressed in section 18-310(1).
3. Whether the district court properly denied Slinkard's Idaho Criminal Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal.

Disposition

affirmed