Savage v. State

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court reversed the summary dismissal of Melvin Jeremy Savage’s petition for post-conviction relief. Savage alleged that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to adequately advise him about his Fifth Amendment rights during a related civil deposition, and the court held that he raised a genuine issue of material fact regarding deficient performance. The case was remanded for further proceedings, and the issue concerning the district court’s refusal to consider Savage’s Rule 60(b) motion was deemed moot.

Holdings

1. The district court erred in summarily dismissing Savage's post-conviction claim because Savage raised a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether counsel's advice about his Fifth Amendment rights constituted deficient performance.
2. Summary dismissal is improper when the petitioner's evidence, viewed under the applicable liberal-construction standard, raises a genuine issue of material fact and the alleged facts, if true, could entitle the petitioner to relief.
3. The issue of whether the district court erred by refusing to consider Savage's Rule 60(b) motion was moot.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred by summarily dismissing Savage's claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately advise him of his Fifth Amendment rights during a related civil deposition.
2. Whether the district court erred by refusing to consider Savage's pro se Rule 60(b) motion while he was represented by post-conviction counsel.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded