# Sivak v. State

> Idaho Supreme Court · November 19, 1986 · 112 Idaho 197

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9626812

## Case

- **Full name:** Lacey M. SIVAK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. the STATE of Idaho, Respondent
- **Court:** Idaho Supreme Court
- **Decided:** November 19, 1986
- **Citations:** 112 Idaho 197; 731 P.2d 192; 1986 Ida. LEXIS 541
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Huntley
- **Judges:** Donaldson, Bistline, Shepard, Bakes, Huntley
- **Cited by:** 95 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9626812

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a capital defendant does not have confrontation rights in a penalty hearing

## Opinion text

HUNTLEY, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in Parts I through VIII of the majority opinion while noting that, with respect to Part I, relative to the resentencing hearing, that the dissent of Justice Bistline herein correctly states the circumstances which justified the trial court in construing this court’s directions in the way it did.
I dissent as to Part IX for the reasons set forth in my dissents in State v. Creech, 105 Idaho 362 , 670 P.2d 463 (1983), and State v. Sivak, 105 Idaho 900 , 674 P.2d 396 (1983).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9626812. Public record. Not legal advice.