State v. Roth, 458 P.3d 150

In Dec. 2011 the district court granted Aaron Roth a one-day jail furlough (Dec. 22) to contact Boise State University; the written furlough order set release and return times and directed the sheriff to serve Roth a copy and included an "escape advisory."
Roth was released but did not return by the stated time; jail records showed release and a checked box indicating a copy was provided, but the district court found the State did not prove Roth received a physical copy.
Roth remained at large until arrested in 2017 and was charged with felony escape under Idaho Code § 18-2505; he was tried and a jury convicted him.
After verdict, Roth renewed I.C.R. 29 motions and moved under I.C.R. 48(a)(2) to dismiss for lack of notice; the district court denied the Rule 29 motion but granted dismissal under Rule 48(a)(2).
The State appealed, arguing the district court abused its discretion because (1) Rule 48 could not properly be used after jeopardy attached (barring refiling), and (2) notice of penalties is not a due-process requirement and, in any event, Roth had adequate notice.
The Idaho Supreme Court reversed the Rule 48 dismissal and remanded, holding the district court exceeded its discretion by using Rule 48 post-jeopardy and that Roth had received sufficient notice from the on-the-record hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal under I.C.R. 48(a)(2) after a jury was empaneled was proper	Rule 48 misuse post-jeopardy; dismissal effectively barred refiling	Dismissal justified by lack of proper notice of penalties	Reversed: court abused discretion; Rule 48 cannot be used to bar reprosecution after jeopardy attached
Whether due process required written service of the furlough order (notice of criminal consequences)	No; notice of statutes/penalties is generally not required and oral court advisement suffices	Yes; due process required proof Roth was served the written furlough with escape advisory	Held: No due-process violation; on-the-record arraignment explanations satisfied notice despite lack of written service
Whether State presented sufficient evidence that Roth was notified of furlough terms	State had judge's oral statements and jail records indicating release and a checked box	State failed to prove physical service of the written order	Held: Court found sufficient notice from the judge's oral statements; absence of proved physical copy did not justify dismissal

Lunneborg v. My Fun Life, 163 Idaho 856 (2018) (abuse-of-discretion review framework)
State v. Dieter, 153 Idaho 730 (2012) (dismissal order must state reasons)
Stockwell v. State, 98 Idaho 797 (1977) (dismissal and refiling for felonies not prohibited by rule text)
Bradbury v. Idaho Judicial Council, 136 Idaho 63 (2001) (procedural due process requires notice and opportunity to be heard)
State v. Calver, 155 Idaho 207 (2013) (citizens presumptively charged with knowledge of criminal statutes)
State v. Avelar, 132 Idaho 775 (1999) (jeopardy attaches when the jury is sworn)