State v. Demotte ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 45663
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )
    )   Filed: January 14, 2019
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )
    )   Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
    v.                                               )
    )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
    DARRELL A. DEMOTTE,                              )   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. Peter G. Barton, District Judge.
    Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of seven years, with a minimum
    period of confinement of two years, for felony operating a motor vehicle while
    under the influence of alcohol, affirmed.
    Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy
    Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
    Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney
    General, Boise, for respondent.
    ________________________________________________
    Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge;
    and BRAILSFORD, Judge
    ________________________________________________
    PER CURIAM
    Darrell A. Demotte was found guilty of felony operating a motor vehicle while under the
    under the influence of alcohol (DUI) (
    Idaho Code §§ 18-8004
    , 18-8005(6)) and misdemeanor
    resisting and/or obstructing an officer (I.C. § 18-705). The district court imposed a unified
    sentence of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for the DUI and a
    concurrent 365-day jail sentence for resisting and/or obstructing an officer. Demotte appeals,
    contending that his DUI sentence is excessive.
    1
    Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the
    factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and
    need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 
    121 Idaho 114
    , 117-18, 
    822 P.2d 1011
    , 1014-
    15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 
    106 Idaho 447
    , 449-51, 
    680 P.2d 869
    , 871-73 (Ct. App.
    1984); State v. Toohill, 
    103 Idaho 565
    , 568, 
    650 P.2d 707
    , 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing
    the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 
    144 Idaho 722
    , 726, 
    170 P.3d 387
    , 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record
    in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.
    Therefore, Demotte’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
    2
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 1/14/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021