Opinion
Docket No. 39368/39413 2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 615
08-29-2012
STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STEPHEN ROBERT JONES, Defendant-Appellant.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Shawn F. Wilkerson, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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 First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. John P. Luster, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and concurrent, unified sentence of five years, with two years determinate, for aggravated assault, affirmed; judgment of conviction and concurrent, unified sentence of three years, with one year determinate, for possession of a controlled substance, affirmed.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Shawn F. Wilkerson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
Before LANSING, Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;
and MELANSON, Judge
PER CURIAM
In docket number 39368, Stephen Robert Jones pled guilty to aggravated assault, Idaho Code §§ 18-901(a), 18-905(b). The district court sentenced Jones to a unified term of five years, with two years determinate, to be served concurrently with his sentence in docket number 39413. In docket number 39413, Jones pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, Idaho Code §§ 37-2732(c)(1), 19-2514. The district court sentenced Jones to a unified term of three years, with one year determinate, to be served concurrently with his sentence in docket number 39368. Jones appeals from both cases, contending his sentences are excessive. The two cases are consolidated on appeal.
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 records in these cases, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.
Therefore, Jones's judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.