State v. Bias

Full title: STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MITCHELL JAMES BIAS…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Feb 25, 2014

Docket No. 40870 (Idaho Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2014)

Opinion

Docket No. 40870 2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 397

02-25-2014

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MITCHELL JAMES BIAS, Defendant-Appellant.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth Ann Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

PER CURIAM

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Minidoka County. Hon. Michael R. Crabtree, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of eight years, with two years determinate, for conspiracy, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth Ann Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Mitchell James Bias was found guilty of conspiracy, with the object of committing the crimes of robbery and burglary. Idaho Code § 18-1701. The district court sentenced Bias to a unified term of eight years, with two years determinate. Bias appeals, contending his sentence is excessive.

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, Bias's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.