Opinion
Docket No. 42914 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 604
08-28-2015
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ROQUE JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Maya P. Waldron, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY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 Sixth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bannock County. Hon. David C. Nye, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years with two years determinate for possession of methamphetamine, affirmed; order relinquishing jurisdiction, affirmed. Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Maya P. Waldron, 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
Roque Johnson pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine. Idaho Code § 37-2732(c)(1). The district court sentenced Johnson to a unified term of five years with two years determinate, suspended his sentence, and retained jurisdiction. Following the period of retained jurisdiction, the district court relinquished jurisdiction and executed Johnson's original sentence. Johnson appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence and by relinquishing jurisdiction.
We note that the decision to place a defendant on probation or whether, instead, to relinquish jurisdiction over the defendant is a matter within the sound discretion of the district court and will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of that discretion. State v. Hood, 102 Idaho 711, 712, 639 P.2d 9, 10 (1981); State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 205-06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). The record in this case shows that the district court properly considered the information before it and determined that probation was not appropriate. We hold that Johnson has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion in relinquishing jurisdiction.
Johnson also contends that his sentence is excessive and constitutes an abuse of discretion. Sentences are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Our appellate standard of review and the factors to be considered when evaluating the reasonableness of a sentence are well-established. State v. Burdett, 134 Idaho 271, 1 P.3d 299 (Ct. App. 2000); State v. Sanchez, 115 Idaho 776, 769 P.2d 1148 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Reinke, 103 Idaho 771, 653 P.2d 1183 (Ct. App. 1982); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 650 P.2d 707 (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).
Johnson argues that all of the relevant goals of sentencing could have been accomplished with probation. As noted above, however, the district court found that probation was not an appropriate course of action in Johnson's case. The record does not indicate that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing.
The order of the district court relinquishing jurisdiction and Johnson's sentence are affirmed.