Opinion
48166
06-08-2021
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ZACHARY WILLIAM BECK, Defendant-Appellant.
Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; John C. McKinney, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Steven J. Hippler, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years with a minimum period of confinement of two years for violation of a no-contact order, and unified sentence of ninety days for trespass, affirmed.
Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; John C. McKinney, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Before HUSKEY, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and BRAILSFORD, Judge
PER CURIAM
Zachary William Beck, while on parole for grand theft and felony violation of a no-contact order, and with an active no-contact order prohibiting any contact with his former wife, went to a women's shelter where his former wife was staying and refused to leave until police arrived. Beck pled guilty to felony violation of a no-contact order and misdemeanor trespass. Idaho Code §§ 18-920, 18-7008(2)(a), 18-7008(3)(a)(i)(2). The district court sentenced Beck to a unified term of five years with two years determinate for the no-contact order violation and ninety days jail time with credit for time served for the trespass charge. Beck appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence.
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, Beck's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.