State v. Aaron Wesley Newman ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 45163
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                 )   2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 675
    )
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                    )   Filed: December 19, 2017
    )
    v.                                              )   Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
    )
    AARON WESLEY NEWMAN,                            )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
    )   OPINION AND SHALL NOT
    Defendant-Appellant.                     )   BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
    )
    Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada
    County. Hon. Samuel A. Hoagland, District Judge.
    Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of
    confinement of three years, for possession of a controlled substance with the intent to
    deliver, methamphetamine, affirmed.
    Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred,
    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; GUTIERREZ, Judge;
    and HUSKEY, Judge
    ________________________________________________
    PER CURIAM
    Aaron Wesley Newman pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance with the
    intent to deliver, methamphetamine, 
    Idaho Code § 37-2732
    (a)(1)(A). The district court imposed
    a unified fifteen-year sentence, with three years determinate. Newman appeals, contending that
    his sentence is excessive.
    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, Newman’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 12/19/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021