State v. Paterson

Full title: STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STEVEN CARL PATERSON…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: May 30, 2014

Docket No. 41215 (Idaho Ct. App. May. 30, 2014)

Opinion

Docket No. 41215 2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 532

05-30-2014

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STEVEN CARL PATERSON, Defendant-Appellant.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

PER CURIAM

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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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. Deborah A. Bail, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of twenty years, with three years determinate, for lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Steven Carl Paterson pled guilty to lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen. Idaho Code § 18-1508. The district court sentenced Paterson to a unified term of twenty years, with three years determinate. Paterson appeals, contending 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, Paterson's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.