State of Idaho v. Jacob Levi Smith

── State of Idaho v. Jacob Levi Smith ── Court: Idaho Court of Appeals Date: May 13, 2026 Category: General IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 52159 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: May 13, 2026 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED JACOB LEVI SMITH, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant. ) ) Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Lynn G. Norton, District Judge. Judgment of conviction for destruction, alteration, or concealment of evidence and being a persistent violator, affirmed. Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds, Deputy Appellate Public Defender; Katherine C. Ball, Joshua Bruce Holmstead, and Faith E. Quigley, University of Idaho Legal Aid Clinic, Boise, for appellant. Faith E. Quigley argued. Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; T. Michael MacEgan, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. T. Michael MacEgan argued. ________________________________________________ LORELLO, Judge Jacob Levi Smith appeals from his judgment of conviction for destruction, alteration, or concealment of evidence and being a persistent violator. We affirm. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Officers responded to a vacant dirt lot behind a local business after receiving a tip from an identified caller reporting suspicious behavior. The caller had a cargo trailer that was kept in the vacant lot with expensive equipment inside and reported that he had been watching a group, who was being “super shady.” The caller described multiple individuals huddled around a vehicle, 1 sorting through backpacks, and additional vehicles coming and going. The caller reported that one individual had a handgun on his hip and wore a red sweater with a marijuana leaf and the word “addicted” on it. The call was reported to officers as possible drug activity. When officers arrived, they saw Smith sitting in a vehicle and asked him to exit. Smith complied by exiting the vehicle with his hands raised. The officers saw Smith had a handgun on his hip, explained they were responding to a report of a person with a handgun, and asked Smith to step away from the vehicle so they could talk to him. In response, Smith fled the scene and hid in a storage shed at a nearby residence. Smith eventually surrendered and was taken into custody. Shortly after apprehending Smith, an officer discovered the handgun hidden in a bush near the vacant lot. Smith was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, concealment of evidence, unlawful entry, and two counts of resisting arrest. The State also charged Smith with a persistent violator sentencing enhancement. Smith filed a motion to suppress, arguing the officers did not have reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigative stop based on the tip received from the caller. The district court denied the motion, finding that the officers had reasonable suspicion to perform a brief investigative stop based on the observations reported by the caller. The district court also found the duration of the stop was not unreasonable. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Smith entered a conditional guilty plea to destruction, alteration, or concealment of evidence (I.C. § 18-2603) and the persistent violator sentencing enhancement (I.C. § 19-2514), reserving his right to challenge th