From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. French

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Oct 1, 2024
No. 50966 (Idaho Ct. App. Oct. 1, 2024)

Opinion

50966

10-01-2024

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. TAYLOR BRENNAN FRENCH, Defendant-Appellant.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kimberly A. Coster, 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UNPUBLISHED OPINION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. Jonathan Medema, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and concurrent, unified sentences of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for felony domestic battery and attempted strangulation, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kimberly A. Coster, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before HUSKEY, Judge; LORELLO, Judge; and TRIBE, Judge

PER CURIAM

Taylor Brennan French pled guilty to domestic battery, Idaho Code §§ 18-918(2), -903(a), and attempted strangulation, I.C. § 18-923. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court imposed concurrent, unified sentences of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years. French appeals, arguing 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, 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, French's judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. French

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Oct 1, 2024
No. 50966 (Idaho Ct. App. Oct. 1, 2024)
Case details for

State v. French

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. TAYLOR BRENNAN FRENCH…

Court:Court of Appeals of Idaho

Date published: Oct 1, 2024

Citations

No. 50966 (Idaho Ct. App. Oct. 1, 2024)