Opinion
Docket No. 42583 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 625
09-11-2015
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SAMUEL CLEVIS EICHLER, Defendant-Appellant.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Eric D. Fredericksen, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, State of Idaho, Latah County. Hon. John R. Stegner, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of fifteen years, for battery with the intent to commit a serious felony and a concurrent unified life sentence, with a minimum period of confinement of fifteen years, for first degree kidnapping, affirmed. Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Eric D. Fredericksen, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge
____________________
PER CURIAM
Samuel Clevis Eichler entered an Alford plea to battery with the intent to commit a serious felony, I.C. § 18-911, and first degree kidnapping, I.C. §§ 18-4501(1) and 18-4502. In exchange for his guilty pleas, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Eichler to a unified term of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of fifteen years, for battery with the intent to commit a serious felony and a concurrent unified life term, with a minimum period of confinement of fifteen years, for kidnapping. Eichler appeals.
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, Eichler's judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.
See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970).