Opinion
No. 1-913 / 01-0467.
Filed January 9, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, JAMES L. BEEGHLY, Judge.
Rhonda Wellner appeals the sentence imposed upon her guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. AFFIRMED.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, Theresa R. Wilson, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Linda J. Hines, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Ferguson, County Attorney, and Jack Lammers, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by HUITINK, P.J., and ZIMMER and VAITHESWARAN, JJ.
Rhonda Wellner appeals the sentence imposed upon her guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(1)(c) (1999). Wellner argues that the district court abused its discretion in failing to consider a recently enacted penalty provision applicable to first convictions of manufacture or delivery of methamphetamine. Specifically, she contends the court was unaware it had the discretion to place her in a residential treatment facility under section 124.401E(1) (Supp. 1999).
We review the district court's sentencing decision for an abuse of discretion. State v. Neary, 470 N.W.2d 27, 29 (Iowa 1991). No abuse of discretion will be found unless the defendant shows that such discretion was exercised for reasons clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable. Id.
We find the district court did not abuse its sentencing discretion in sentencing Wellner to an indeterminate ten-year term of imprisonment. At the sentencing hearing the State recommended a term of imprisonment not to exceed ten years. Defense counsel, conversely, requested placement in a residential treatment facility. There is no indication in the record that the court was unaware it had the discretion to place Wellner in a treatment facility. See State v. Vanover, 559 N.W.2d 618, 635 (Iowa 1997); State v. Mudra, 532 N.W.2d 765, 767 (Iowa 1995) (burden is on defendant to provide record affirmatively disclosing district court's abuse of discretion). Rather, the court noted Wellner's request, but stated instead that it found prison the more appropriate punishment. Contrary to Wellner's assertions, the district court is not required to give reasons for rejecting a particular sentencing option. Vanover, 559 N.W.2d at 635.
The district court decision is affirmed in its entirety.
AFFIRMED.