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.

State v. Kelly

Court of Appeals of Idaho

June 19, 2015

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
KURTIS THOMAS KELLY, Defendant-Appellant

2015 Opinion No. 35

Page 1097

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. Richard S. Christensen, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction for battery on a law enforcement officer, affirmed.

John M. Adams, Kootenai County Public Defender; Jay Logsdon, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Coeur d'Alene, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Russell J. Spencer, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

MELANSON, Chief Judge. Judge LANSING and Judge GRATTON, CONCUR.

OPINION

Page 1098

 MELANSON, Chief Judge

Kurtis Thomas Kelly appeals from his judgment of conviction for battery on a law enforcement officer. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

I.

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The basic facts in this case are undisputed. A uniformed officer was dispatched around 1:30 a.m. to a bar in response to a call reporting a fight. The officer saw Kelly sitting on the sidewalk in handcuffs. The officer had the handcuffs removed and questioned Kelly. The officer determined that Kelly was intoxicated and needed to go home. One of his friends, who was sober, offered to drive Kelly home. The friend and Kelly's wife asked the officer for assistance in getting Kelly into the friend's car because Kelly was too intoxicated to walk. On their way to the car, Kelly complained about pain in his arm and stated that he did not want to go to jail. While being assisted into the car, Kelly stood up and punched the officer in the face with a closed fist.

Kelly was arrested and charged with battery on a law enforcement officer. I.C. § § 18-903, 18-915(3). He moved to dismiss the charge, arguing that the state failed to allege facts which established that the officer was exercising an official duty when he was struck. The district court denied the motion. After the state rested at trial, Kelly moved for an acquittal, again arguing that the state failed to meet its burden of proving what specific official duty the officer was performing at the time he was struck. The motion was denied. Kelly now appeals, alleging that those motions were improperly denied and the district court made a number of errors at trial.

II.

ANALYSIS


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.