From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Gothmann

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Jul 9, 2024
No. 50824 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 9, 2024)

Opinion

50824

07-09-2024

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. COURTNEY BRYAN GOTHMANN, Defendant-Appellant.

Erik R. Lehtinen, 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UNPUBLISHED OPINION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 First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. Susie Jensen, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction of conviction and unified sentence of twelve years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for lewd conduct with a child under sixteen, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, 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 GRATTON, Chief Judge; LORELLO, Judge; and TRIBE, Judge

PER CURIAM

Courtney Bryan Gothmann pled guilty to lewd conduct with a child under sixteen. I.C. § 18-1508. The district court sentenced Gothmann to a unified term of twelve years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years. Gothmann 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, 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). 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, Gothmann's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Gothmann

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Jul 9, 2024
No. 50824 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 9, 2024)
Case details for

State v. Gothmann

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. COURTNEY BRYAN GOTHMANN…

Court:Court of Appeals of Idaho

Date published: Jul 9, 2024

Citations

No. 50824 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 9, 2024)