State v. Richardson ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 45974
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                )
    )   Filed: December 6, 2018
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                   )
    )   Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
    v.                                             )
    )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
    JAMEE LEE RICHARDSON,                          )   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 fourteen years, with a minimum
    period of confinement of two years, for grand theft by receiving and/or possession
    stolen property, affirmed.
    Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Sally J. Cooley, 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 LORELLO, Judge
    ________________________________________________
    PER CURIAM
    Jamee Lee Richardson pled guilty to grand theft by receiving and/or possessing stolen
    property. I.C. §§ 18-2403(4), 18-2407, and 18-2409. In exchange for her guilty plea, an
    additional charge was dismissed and the State agreed not to pursue an allegation that Richardson
    is a persistent violator. The district court sentenced Richardson to a unified term of fourteen
    years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years. Richardson appeals, asserting that
    her 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, Richardson’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
    2