eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Idaho Court of Appeals
 2019-05

State v. Marx ( 2019 )


Menu:
 
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Docket No. 46206
STATE OF IDAHO,                                 )
)   Filed: May 16, 2019
Plaintiff-Respondent,                    )
)   Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
v.                                              )
)   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
DOROTHY ELLEN MARX,                             )   OPINION AND SHALL NOT
)   BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Defendant-Appellant.                     )
)
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho,
Elmore County. Hon. George D. Carey, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum
period of confinement of two years, for felony driving under the
influence, affirmed.
Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, 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 LORELLO, Judge
________________________________________________
PER CURIAM
Dorothy Ellen Marx was found guilty of felony driving under the influence. I.C. § 18-
8004(1)(a). The district court sentenced Marx to a unified term of five years, with a minimum
period of confinement of two years. The district court retained jurisdiction and sent Marx to
participate in the rider program. Marx appeals, arguing that her 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
1
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, Marx’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
2