State v. Rhoades

Full title: STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DEE ALAN RHOADES…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Feb 28, 2014

Docket No. 41057 (Idaho Ct. App. Feb. 28, 2014)

Opinion

Docket No. 41057 Docket No. 41058 2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 400

02-28-2014

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DEE ALAN RHOADES, 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; 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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 Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonneville County. Hon. Joel E. Tingey, District Judge.

Judgments of conviction and concurrent, unified sentences of seven years, with two and one-half years determinate, for possession of a controlled substance and burglary, affirmed.

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

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

In Docket No. 41057, Dee Alan Rhoades pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance. Idaho Code § 37-2732(c)(1). In Docket No. 4158, Rhoades pled guilty to burglary. I.C. § 18-1401. In a consolidated sentencing hearing, the district court sentenced Rhoades to concurrent, unified terms of seven years, with two and one-half years determinate. Rhoades appeals, 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 record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Rhoades' judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.