Track

Status

Governing provision

No limitation — § 19-401: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, there is no limitation of time within which a prosecution for the following crimes must be commenced: (1) Murder; (2) Voluntary manslaughter; (3) Rape pursuant to section 18-6101(3) through (10), Idaho Code; (4) Sexual abuse of a child, lewd conduct with a child, or aggravated lewd conduct with a child as set forth in sections 18-1506, 18-1508, 18-1508B, and 18-1508C, Idaho Code; (5) Producing or making sexually exploitative material as set forth in section 18-1507(2)(b), Idaho Code; or (6) An act of terrorism as set forth in sections 18-8102, 18-8103, 18-3322, 18-3323 and 18-3324, Idaho Code.” 

Five years for other felonies, and a discovery rule for two of them — § 19-402: “A prosecution for any felony other than those specified in section 19-401, Idaho Code, must be commenced by the filing of the complaint or the finding of an indictment within five (5) years after its commission, provided however, a prosecution under sections 18-1506A and 18-1506B, Idaho Code, must be commenced within three (3) years after the date of initial disclosure by the victim to law enforcement.” 

One year for misdemeanors, four for failure to report — § 19-403(1): a prosecution for any misdemeanor must be commenced within one year after its commission. § 19-403(2): a prosecution for failure to report child abuse must be initiated within four years after its commission. § 19-403(3): misuse of funds, five years. § 19-403(4): a dismissed misdemeanor must be refiled no later than two years after its dismissal. 

Why “partly removed”: the four core child sexual abuse felonies — sexual abuse of a child, lewd conduct, aggravated lewd conduct, and producing sexually exploitative material — are unlimited, and so is rape in most of its statutory forms. What remains on a clock is everything else. Any sexual felony outside the § 19-401 list carries five years from commission, not from the victim’s majority and not from discovery; and any sexual misdemeanor carries one year from commission. For a child abused at eight, a five-year period running from the act expires at thirteen. That is the gap, and it is a wide one.

Idaho Code § 19-401 — Idaho Legislature, official Idaho Statutes 

Idaho Code § 19-402 — Idaho Legislature, official Idaho Statutes 

Idaho Code § 19-403 — Idaho Legislature, official Idaho Statutes

The period — § 6-1704(1): “Notwithstanding any limitation contained in chapter 2, title 5, Idaho Code, an action under the provisions of this chapter must be commenced within five (5) years from the date that an aggrieved child reaches the age of eighteen (18) years or, after the child reaches the age of eighteen (18) years, within five (5) years of the time the child discovers or reasonably should have discovered the act, abuse or exploitation and its causal relationship to an injury or condition suffered by the child, whichever occurs later.” The practical floor is therefore the survivor’s twenty-third birthday. 

A continuing-course rule — § 6-1704(2): “The child need not establish which act in a series of continuing acts, abuse or exploitation caused the injury complained of but may compute the date of discovery from the date of discovery of the last act by the same perpetrator which is part of a common scheme or plan.” 

A parent’s knowledge is not the child’s — § 6-1704(3): “The knowledge of a custodial parent or guardian shall not be imputed to a child under the age of eighteen (18) years.” This matters more than it looks: it forecloses the argument that the clock started because a parent knew, which is a common defense where abuse occurred inside a family or an institution the parent trusted. 

Idaho’s discovery limb is genuinely open-ended — five years from discovery of both the act and its causal relationship to an injury, with no outer cap in the section. That is a more generous structure than the bare age-23 floor suggests, and it is the limb on which most late claims will turn. But it is still a deadline, and the tracker’s “Deadline applies” is right.

Idaho Code § 6-1704 — Idaho Legislature, official Idaho Statutes

Neither § 6-1704 nor Title 6, Chapter 17 contains any provision reviving claims barred under prior law, and neither the 1989 enactment nor the 2007 amendment carries a retroactivity clause of that kind on the face of the section. 

The 2007 amendment is the closest Idaho has come to reaching back, and it did not do so on the face of the statute — it changed the period itself rather than reopening anything. 

Nothing is asserted here about whether Idaho COULD open a window. The vested-rights question that divides Arkansas and Colorado from Connecticut has not been in Idaho case law in this review, and no Idaho decision is cited in the source folder. If CHILD USA wants that answer, it is a targeted search rather than a statutory question.

Idaho Code § 6-1704 — Idaho Legislature, official Idaho Statutes

no Idaho row.