eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Idaho Court of Appeals
 2014-07

State v. Mark Edward Ollis ( 2014 )


Menu:
 
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Docket No. 41626
STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )      2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 612
)
Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )      Filed: July 7, 2014
)
v.                                               )      Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
)
MARK EDWARD OLLIS,                               )      THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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. Michael E. Wetherell, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of six years, with a minimum period
of confinement of one and one-half years, for burglary, affirmed.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy
Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney
General, Boise, for respondent.
________________________________________________
Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;
and GRATTON, Judge
PER CURIAM
Mark Edward Ollis was convicted of burglary, Idaho Code § 18-1401. The district court
sentenced Ollis to a unified term of six years, with a minimum period of confinement of one and
one-half years. Ollis 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
1
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, Ollis’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
2