State v. Robbins

Full title: STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. TYLER ALEXANDER ROBBINS…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Dec 23, 2013

Docket No. 40693 (Idaho Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2013)

Opinion

Docket No. 40693 2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 797

12-23-2013

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. TYLER ALEXANDER ROBBINS, Defendant-Appellant.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Reed P. Anderson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY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 Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon County. Hon. Molly J. Huskey, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for sexual abuse of a child under sixteen, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Reed P. Anderson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Tyler Alexander Robbins pled guilty to sexual abuse of a child under sixteen. I.C. § 18-1506. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Robbins to a unified term of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years. Robbins filed an I.C.R. 35 motion for reduction of his sentence, which the district court denied. Robbins appeals.

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, Robbins's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.