Opinion
50668
11-28-2023
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DREW DOUGLAS COLE, Defendant-Appellant.
Erik R. Lehtinen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C. Swinford, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Derrick J. O'Neill, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for felony driving under the influence, affirmed.
Erik R. Lehtinen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C. Swinford, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Before LORELLO, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge
PER CURIAM
Drew Douglas Cole pled guilty to felony driving under the influence. I.C. §§ 18-8004 and 18-8005(9). In exchange for his guilty plea, an additional charge was dismissed, and the State agreed not to pursue a sentencing enhancement. The district court sentenced Cole to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, to be served concurrently with an unrelated sentence. Cole filed an I.C.R. 35 motion, which the district court denied. Cole appeals, arguing that 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, 101415 (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). Our role is limited to determining whether reasonable minds could reach the same conclusion as the district court. State v. Biggs, 168 Idaho 112, 116, 480 P.3d 150, 154 (Ct. App. 2020). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.
Therefore, Cole's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.