Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Eluith S. Delgado v. State of Idaho

October 3, 2012

ELUITH S. DELGADO,
PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF IDAHO, RESPONDENT.



Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bannock County. Hon. Robert C. Naftz, District Judge.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gratton, Chief Judge

2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 658

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Eluith S. Delgado appeals from the district court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief and denial of his request for appointment of counsel. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

I.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL

Delgado pled guilty to first degree kidnapping, Idaho Code § 18-4502. In exchange for his guilty plea, the State dismissed a rape charge and agreed not to seek a habitual offender enhancement. Delgado was sentenced to a unified term of life, with thirty years determinate. Subsequently, Delgado filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reduction of sentence, contending that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence and that the State violated the terms of the plea agreement. The district court denied the motion and this Court affirmed in State v. Delgado, Docket No. 34689 (Ct. App. June 19, 2009)

(unpublished).

Thereafter, Delgado's defense counsel filed a petition for post-conviction relief contending that: (1) the sentence imposed was for conduct to which Delgado did not plead; (2)

the sentencing judge sentenced Delgado for a rape charge that had been dismissed; and (3) the sentence was excessive. The petition also requested the appointment of counsel. The district court denied the appointment of counsel and summarily dismissed the petition, finding no genuine issue of material fact existed. Delgado timely appeals.

II.

ANALYSIS

Delgado contends that the district court erred in dismissing his petition. He asserts that the district court improperly denied his request for appointment of counsel. He further contends that he received an illegal ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.