From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Ramirez

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Jul 1, 2016
Docket No. 43398 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 1, 2016)

Opinion

Docket No. 43398 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 591

07-01-2016

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JOSE ADRIAN RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

Sara B. Thomas, 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.


Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Twin Falls County. Hon. Randy J. Stoker, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and sentence, affirmed. Sara B. Thomas, 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 MELANSON, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge

____________________

PER CURIAM

Jose Adrian Ramirez was found guilty of grand theft, Idaho Code §§ 18-2403, 18-2407(1)(b)(6), and unlawful possession of a firearm, I.C. § 18-3316. The district court imposed a unified fourteen-year sentence, with five years determinate, for the grand theft charge, and a determinate five-year sentence for the unlawful possession of a firearm charge. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Ramirez filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied. Ramirez appeals, asserting the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence.

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. 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, Ramirez's judgment of conviction and sentence is affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Ramirez

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Jul 1, 2016
Docket No. 43398 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 1, 2016)
Case details for

State v. Ramirez

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JOSE ADRIAN RAMIREZ…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Jul 1, 2016

Citations

Docket No. 43398 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 1, 2016)