From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Madrid

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Jun 25, 2019
Docket No. 46331 (Idaho Ct. App. Jun. 25, 2019)

Opinion

Docket No. 46331

06-25-2019

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PHILLIP TINO MADRID, Defendant-Appellant.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.


Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Lynn G. Norton, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for felony domestic violence, affirmed. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Before HUSKEY, Judge; LORELLO, Judge; and BRAILSFORD, Judge

____________________

PER CURIAM

Phillip Tino Madrid pled guilty to felony domestic violence. I.C. §§ 18-918(2) and 18-903. In exchange for his guilty plea, an additional charge was dismissed. The district court sentenced Madrid to a unified term of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, to run consecutively to an unrelated sentence. Madrid 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). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Madrid's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Madrid

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Jun 25, 2019
Docket No. 46331 (Idaho Ct. App. Jun. 25, 2019)
Case details for

State v. Madrid

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PHILLIP TINO MADRID…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Jun 25, 2019

Citations

Docket No. 46331 (Idaho Ct. App. Jun. 25, 2019)