Opinion
Case No. 20060267-CA.
Filed: June 7, 2007. NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.
Appeal from Fifth District, St. George Department, 041501300, The Honorable Eric A. Ludlow.
Margaret P. Lindsay, Orem, for Appellant.
Mark L. Shurtleff and Marian Decker, Salt Lake City, for Appellee.
Before Judges Bench, McHugh, and Thorne.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Anthony Ray Cosentino appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to sexual abuse of a child. We affirm.
Appellate courts "traditionally afford the trial court wide latitude and discretion in sentencing." State v. Woodland, 945 P.2d 665, 671 (Utah 1997). A trial court's sentencing decision will be reversed only if it is an abuse of the court's discretion. See State v. Helms, 2002 UT 12, ¶ 8, 40 P.3d 626. Furthermore, there is no entitlement or right to probation, but rather, granting probation is "within the complete discretion of the trial court." State v. Rhodes, 818 P.2d 1048, 1049 (Utah Ct.App. 1991).
Cosentino has not shown that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him to prison rather than granting probation and sex offender treatment a second time. The pre-sentence report recommended prison and noted that Cosentino was not a candidate for probation. The report labeled Cosentino a predator and stated that Cosentino had consciously groomed the victim. Additionally, Cosentino had a prior offense similar to the current offense and had been through sex offender treatment once before. Cosentino, however, ignored the tools provided by treatment and instead pursued the victim. As a result, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it sentenced Cosentino to prison.
Affirmed.
Russell W. Bench, Presiding Judge
Carolyn B. McHugh, Judge
William A. Thorne Jr., Judge