Opinion
Docket No. 41770 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 556
07-20-2015
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. WILLIAM C. DORAHUSH, JR., Defendant-Appellant.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Gem County. Hon. George A. Southworth, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and concurrent unified sentences of twenty-five years, with minimum periods of confinement of five years, for conspiracy to commit arson and first degree arson, affirmed. Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, 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
William C. Dorahush, Jr. pled guilty to conspiracy to commit arson and first degree arson. I.C. §§ 18-1701 and 18-802. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed including an allegation that he was a persistent violator. The district court sentenced Dorahush to concurrent unified terms of twenty-five years, with minimum periods of confinement of five years. Dorahush filed an I.C.R 35 motion, which the district court denied. Dorahush appeals.
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 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, Dorahush's judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.