State v. Simon, Jr ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 46353
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                 )
    )   Filed: March 14, 2019
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                    )
    )   Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
    v.                                              )
    )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
    MICHAEL RAY SIMON, JR.,                         )   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. Samuel A. Hoagland, District Judge.
    Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years with two years
    determinate for grand theft by possession of stolen property, affirmed.
    Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jenevieve C. Swinford,
    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; LORELLO, Judge;
    and BRAILSFORD, Judge
    ________________________________________________
    PER CURIAM
    Michael Ray Simon, Jr. pled guilty to grand theft by possession of stolen property, 
    Idaho Code § 18-2403
    (4). The district court imposed a unified sentence of ten years with two years
    determinate and retained jurisdiction. Simon 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, Simon’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
    2
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 3/14/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021