State v. Joseph R. Clinton
155 Idaho 271
Idaho2013Background
- Defendant Joseph Richard Clinton pleaded guilty to lewd conduct with a minor under 16 after being found competent following an initial incompetency finding.
- Pre‑sentence, Clinton received a psychosexual evaluation but neither requested a mental evaluation under Idaho Code § 19‑2522 nor objected to the court’s failure to order one sua sponte.
- The psychologist diagnosed Clinton as a pedophile, of low intellectual functioning, with poor insight and a high risk to reoffend; recommended treatment in a structured environment.
- Clinton had a prior conviction for lewd conduct involving three young boys and previously admitted to molesting many children.
- The district court sentenced Clinton to 20 years in custody (3 years fixed), recommended in‑custody sex‑offender treatment, and denied a Crim. R. 35 motion for reduction. The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Clinton) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by failing to sua sponte order a mental evaluation under I.C. § 19‑2522 | No reversible error; failure to order does not implicate a constitutional right and, absent timely objection, is not subject to fundamental‑error review | The court should have ordered an evaluation before sentencing | Affirmed: no fundamental error; court’s failure to order evaluation is not reviewable as fundamental error |
| Whether the 20‑year (3 fixed) sentence was an abuse of discretion | Sentence appropriate given offense severity, risk to public, and high likelihood of reoffense | Sentence excessive given dementia, amenability to treatment, community supports, and request for treatment | Affirmed: sentence not an abuse of discretion; factors (prior offenses, high risk, limited capacity for treatment) support sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Perry, 150 Idaho 209, 245 P.3d 961 (Idaho 2010) (describes scope of fundamental‑error review)
- State v. Suriner, 154 Idaho 81, 294 P.3d 1093 (Idaho 2013) (procedure when Idaho Supreme Court grants petition for review)
- State v. Al‑Kotrani, 141 Idaho 66, 106 P.3d 392 (Idaho 2005) (abuse of discretion standard for sentencing)
- State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 722, 170 P.3d 387 (Idaho 2007) (treatment of fixed portion of sentence as probable confinement term)