Opinion
Docket No. 45138 2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 673
12-18-2017
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MARCO A. CHI CORDERO, Defendant-Appellant.
Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben P. McGreevy, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk
THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Richard D. Greenwood, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and concurrent unified sentences of twenty years, with eight years determinate, for three counts of lewd conduct with a child under sixteen and concurrent unified sentence of ten years, with five years determinate, for one count of enticement of a child through the use of the Internet or other communication device, affirmed. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben P. McGreevy, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge PER CURIAM
Marco A. Chi Cordero pled guilty to three counts of lewd conduct with a child under sixteen, Idaho Code § 18-1508, and one count of enticement of a child through the use of the Internet or other communication device, Idaho Code § 18-1509A. The district court imposed concurrent unified sentences of twenty years, with eight years determinate, on each of the lewd conduct counts and a concurrent unified sentence of ten years, with five years determinate, on the enticement count. Cordero appeals, contending that his sentences are 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, Cordero's judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.