From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hicks

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Nov 26, 2024
No. 50873 (Idaho Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2024)

Opinion

50873

11-26-2024

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ARCHIE ALLEN HICKS, Defendant-Appellant.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben P. McGreevy, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kacey L. Jones, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Benewah County. Hon. Barbara Duggan, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for intimidating a witness and being a persistent violator, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben P. McGreevy, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kacey L. Jones, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

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

PER CURIAM

Archie Allen Hicks was found guilty of intimidating a witness, I.C. § 18-2604(3), and being a persistent violator, I.C. § 19-2514. The district court sentenced Hicks to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years. Hicks 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, Hicks's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Hicks

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Nov 26, 2024
No. 50873 (Idaho Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2024)
Case details for

State v. Hicks

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ARCHIE ALLEN HICKS…

Court:Court of Appeals of Idaho

Date published: Nov 26, 2024

Citations

No. 50873 (Idaho Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2024)