From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Ford

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Oct 28, 2015
Docket No. 43001 (Idaho Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2015)

Opinion

Docket No. 43001 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 677

10-28-2015

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SAMUEL DAVID FORD, 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.


Stephen W. Kenyon, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY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. Lynn G. Norton, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years with three years determinate, and a consecutive sentence of ten years indeterminate, for two counts of felony injury to children, 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 MELANSON, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge

____________________

PER CURIAM

Samuel David Ford pled guilty to two counts of felony injury to children. Idaho Code § 18-1501(1). The district court sentenced Ford to a unified term of ten years with three years determinate, and a consecutive sentence of ten years indeterminate. Ford appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing excessive sentences.

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, Ford's judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Ford

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Oct 28, 2015
Docket No. 43001 (Idaho Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2015)
Case details for

State v. Ford

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SAMUEL DAVID FORD…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Oct 28, 2015

Citations

Docket No. 43001 (Idaho Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2015)