State v. Gonzalez ( 2019 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Docket No. 46067
STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: April 2, 2019
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
SERGIO ENRIQUE GONZALEZ, aka ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT
SERGIO GONZALES, ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
)
Defendant-Appellant. )
)
Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho,
Canyon County. Hon. George A. Southworth, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and concurrent, unified sentences of life with twenty-five-
year determinate terms for two counts of lewd conduct with a minor under
sixteen, 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 HUSKEY, Judge; LORELLO, Judge;
and BRAILSFORD, Judge
________________________________________________
PER CURIAM
Sergio Enrique Gonzalez was found guilty of two counts of lewd conduct with a minor
under sixteen, Idaho Code § 18-1508. The district court imposed concurrent, unified sentences
of life with twenty-five-year determinate terms. Gonzalez appeals, contending that his sentences
are 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, Gonzalez’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.
2