From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Jacuinde

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Jun 17, 2021
No. 48246 (Idaho Ct. App. Jun. 17, 2021)

Opinion

48246

06-17-2021

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MANUEL JACUINDE, Defendant-Appellant.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jennifer Jensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Minidoka County. Hon. Jonathan P. Brody, District Judge.

Order revoking probation, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jennifer Jensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before GRATTON, Judge; LORELLO, Judge; and BRAILSFORD, Judge

PER CURIAM

1

Manuel Jacuinde pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine, Idaho Code § 37-2732(c)(1). In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court imposed a unified sentence of five years with two years determinate, suspended the sentence, and placed Jacuinde on probation. Subsequently, Jacuinde admitted to violating the terms of the probation, and the district court consequently revoked probation and retained jurisdiction. Jacuinde appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in revoking probation and retaining jurisdiction.

It is within the trial court's discretion to revoke probation if any of the terms and conditions of the probation have been violated. I.C. §§ 19-2603, 20-222; State v. Beckett, 122 Idaho 324, 325, 834 P.2d 326, 327 (Ct. App. 1992); State v. Adams, 115 Idaho 1053, 1054, 772 P.2d 260, 261 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Hass, 114 Idaho 554, 558, 758 P.2d 713, 717 (Ct. App. 1988). In determining whether to revoke probation a court must examine whether the probation is achieving the goal of rehabilitation and consistent with the protection of society. State v. Upton, 127 Idaho 274, 275, 899 P.2d 984, 985 (Ct. App. 1995); Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; Hass, 114 Idaho at 558, 758 P.2d at 717. The court may, after a probation violation has been established, order that the suspended sentence be executed or, in the alternative, the court is authorized under I.C.R. 35 to reduce the sentence. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; State v. Marks, 116 Idaho 976, 977, 783 P.2d 315, 316 (Ct. App. 1989). The court may also order a period of retained jurisdiction. I.C. § 19-2601(4). A decision to revoke probation will be disturbed on appeal only upon a showing that the trial court abused its discretion. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327. In reviewing the propriety of a probation revocation, the focus of the inquiry is the conduct underlying the trial court's decision to revoke probation. State v. Morgan, 153 Idaho 618, 621, 288 P.3d 835, 838 (Ct. App. 2012). Thus, this Court will consider the elements of the record before the trial court relevant to the revocation of probation issues which are properly made part of the record on appeal. Id.

Sentencing is also a matter for the trial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of a 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). That discretion includes the trial court's decision regarding whether a defendant should be placed on probation and whether to retain jurisdiction. I.C. § 19-2601(3), (4); State v. Reber, 138 Idaho 275, 278, 61 P.3d 632, 635 (Ct. App. 2002); State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 205-06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). The record in this case shows that the district court properly considered the information before it and determined that probation was not appropriate. We hold that Jacuinde has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion.

Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion. Therefore, Jacuinde's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Jacuinde

Court of Appeals of Idaho
Jun 17, 2021
No. 48246 (Idaho Ct. App. Jun. 17, 2021)
Case details for

State v. Jacuinde

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MANUEL JACUINDE…

Court:Court of Appeals of Idaho

Date published: Jun 17, 2021

Citations

No. 48246 (Idaho Ct. App. Jun. 17, 2021)