|ICJI 1278 DOMESTIC ASSAULT/BATTERY ENHANCEMENT—PRIOR CONVICTIONS OR GUILTY PLEAS
Having found the defendant guilty of Domestic [Assault] [Battery], you must next decide whether the defendant has pled guilty to or was found guilty of Domestic [Assault] [Battery] [within the last ten] [twice or more times within the last fifteen] years. The state alleges:
1. On , 19 , the defendant [pled guilty to] [was found guilty of] a violation of IC § 18–918, Domestic [Assault] [Battery], in [name of county], Idaho, Case No. [.][, and
2. On , 19 , the defendant [pled guilty to] [was found guilty of] a violation of IC § 18–918, Domestic [Assault] [Battery] in [name of county] Idaho, Case No. [.]
[3. (Add other prior offenses).]
The state must prove the existence of [this] [these] event[s] beyond a reasonable doubt.
I.C. § 18–918(3).
State v. Johnson, 86 Idaho 51, 383 P2d 326 (1963) held that a persistent violator charge should be stated in a two-part information. The first part should state the particular offense with which the defendant is charged, and be signed at the end of the page by the prosecutor. The second part, or page, should allege former convictions, and be separable from the first part. It should be signed separately by the prosecutor. The entire information should be read to the accused at arraignment. However, when the jury is informed of the charge only the first part is read, then, after, and depending upon the verdict on part one, the second part is read, and the jury deliberates further.
A Special Verdict instruction, similar to the ones suggested for enhanced DUI and DWP offenses (ICJI 1009 and 1024) should be used.
The determination of whether a foreign criminal violation is substantially conforming is a question of law to be determined by the court. I.C. § 18-918(6).