Suiter__CtApp - IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 25783 STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PATRICK SHELDON SUITER, Defendant-Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2001 Opinion No. 68 Filed: September 4, 2001 Frederick C. Lyon, Clerk Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon County. Hon. Stephen W. Drescher, District Judge. Hon. Robert M. Taisey, Magistrate. Order of the district court, on appeal from the magistrate division, affirming judgment of conviction for disturbing the peace, affirmed. Thomas A. Sullivan argued. Hon. Alan G. Lance, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Lori A. Fleming argued. ______________________________________________ PERRY, Judge Patrick Sheldon Suiter appeals from the district court’s decision affirming his judgment of conviction for disturbing the peace. I.C. § 18-6409. I. BACKGROUND On April 3, 1998, Suiter went to the Canyon County Courthouse and spoke to an officer in the records division about a fraudulent check case. Suiter became frustrated with the officer’s responses to his inquiries. As the discussion escalated, Suiter told the officer in a loud voice to “fuck off.” In addition to the officer with whom he was speaking, a number of other individuals overheard Suiter’s comments including two additional officers, two employees of the records department, and two members of the public. Suiter was charged with disturbing the peace.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
2 Suiter moved to dismiss the charge, asserting that it violated his free speech rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The motion was denied by the magistrate. The case proceeded to jury trial. During the trial, Suiter again moved to dismiss the case. The magistrate also denied this motion. The jury found Suiter guilty of disturbing the peace. Suiter appealed to the district court, which affirmed the judgment of conviction. Suiter again appeals, claiming that Idaho’s disturbing the peace statute is unconstitutionally overbroad as applied to the facts of his case. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW On review of a decision of the district court, rendered in its appellate capacity, we examine the record of the trial court independently of, but with due regard for, the district court’s intermediate appellate decision. State v. Bowman , 124 Idaho 936, 939, 866 P.2d 193, 196 (Ct. App. 1993). Where the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance is challenged, we review the trial court’s ruling de novo since it involves purely a question of law. State v. Cobb , 132 Idaho 195, 197, 969 P.2d 244, 246 (1998). III.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Fall '11
  • Parks
  • Supreme Court of the United States, First Amendment to the United States Constitution, United States Supreme Court, PATRICK SHELDON SUITER, suiter

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 16

Suiter__CtApp - IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online