context: Here, Kluss contends that the error committed is "of constitutional dimensions," and he focuses solely upon Article I, SS 13 of the Idaho Constitution, providing that "No person shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense ..." However, as our Supreme Court has often held, even constitutional issues presented for the first time on appeal may not be considered unless fundamental error is shown or the case falls within some other exception to the rule.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 121 Idaho 594, 597
citation_a.parenthetical: the Court considered whether Kenner's privilege against self-incrimination had been violated because the allegation, had it been true, suggested fundamental error
citation_a.sentence: See also State v. Kenner, 121 Idaho 594, 597, 826 P.2d 1306, 1309 (1992) (the Court considered whether Kenner’s privilege against self-incrimination had been violated because the allegation, had it been true, suggested fundamental error).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.parenthetical: constitutional challenge to the statute on included offenses, I.C. SS 19-2132, first raised on appeal was held to be barred by the rule
citation_b.sentence: See, e.g., State v. Fodge, 121 Idaho 192, 824 P.2d 123 (1992) (constitutional challenge to the statute on included offenses, I.C. § 19-2132, first raised on appeal was held to be barred by the rule), citing Sanchez v. Arave, 120 Idaho 321, 815 P.2d 1061 (1991).