Filed Date: 10/4/2016
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 43966 STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 718 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: October 4, 2016 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) SCOTT GREGORY HAYES, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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. Deborah A. Bail, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for attempted rape, affirmed. Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny 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 MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and GRATTON, Judge ________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Scott Gregory Hayes pled guilty to attempted rape,Idaho Code §§ 18-6101
(1), 18-306. The district court imposed a unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years. Hayes 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, Hayes’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed. 2