From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Northrup

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Mar 26, 2012
Docket No. 39086 (Idaho Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2012)

Opinion

Docket No. 39086

03-26-2012

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DAVID EVERETT NORTHRUP, Defendant-Appellant.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.


2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 410


Stephen W. Kenyon, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY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. Cheri C. Copsey, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period

of confinement of four years, for felony domestic violence, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before LANSING, Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

David Everett Northrup pled guilty to felony domestic violence. I.C. §§ 18-903(a), 918(2), 918(4). In exchange for his guilty plea, an additional charge and sentencing enhancement were dismissed. The district court sentenced Northrup to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years. Northrup appeals.

Northrup also pled guilty to misdemeanor violation of a no-contact order. However this judgment of conviction and sentence are not challenged 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 record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

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


Summaries of

State v. Northrup

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Mar 26, 2012
Docket No. 39086 (Idaho Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2012)
Case details for

State v. Northrup

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DAVID EVERETT NORTHRUP…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Mar 26, 2012

Citations

Docket No. 39086 (Idaho Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2012)