Porter v. State, 139 Idaho 420

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court dismissed George Porter's appeal from the summary dismissal of his third petition for post-conviction relief. The court held that his ineffective-assistance and prosecutorial-misconduct claims were known or reasonably should have been known during earlier proceedings and were therefore barred under Idaho Code § 19-2719.

Holdings

1. Porter's ineffective-assistance claims were barred because their factual bases were known or reasonably should have been known when he filed his first post-conviction petition.
2. The prosecutorial-misconduct claim was barred because the allegedly withheld notes were attached to a defense expert's report and played a role in the earlier post-conviction proceedings, making the claim known or reasonably knowable at that time.
3. The State's motion to dismiss the appeal was granted because Idaho Code section 19-2719 barred the claims and precluded review of their merits.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Porter's ineffective-assistance claims in his third post-conviction petition fell within the statutory exception for claims that were not known and reasonably could not have been known within the time allowed by Idaho Code section 19-2719.
2. Whether Porter's prosecutorial-misconduct claim based on allegedly withheld exculpatory evidence fell within that exception.
3. Whether the Idaho Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the dismissal of the successive petition.

Disposition

dismissed