From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Rosales

Court of Appeals of Idaho
May 25, 2023
No. 50254 (Idaho Ct. App. May. 25, 2023)

Opinion

50254

05-25-2023

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RAY DAVID ROSALES, Defendant-Appellant.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Emily M. Joyce, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. John T. Mitchell, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of nine years, for domestic battery with traumatic injury, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Emily M. Joyce, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raul R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before LORELLO, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge

PER CURIAM

Ray David Rosales entered an Alford plea to domestic battery with traumatic injury, Idaho Code §§ 18-903, 18-918(2). The district court imposed a unified sentence of ten years with nine years determinate. Rosales appeals, contending that his sentence is excessive.

See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970).

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, 101415 (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). Our role is limited to determining whether reasonable minds could reach the same conclusion as the district court. State v. Biggs, 168 Idaho 112, 116, 480 P.3d 150, 154 (Ct. App. 2020).

Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion. Therefore, Rosales' judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Rosales

Court of Appeals of Idaho
May 25, 2023
No. 50254 (Idaho Ct. App. May. 25, 2023)
Case details for

State v. Rosales

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RAY DAVID ROSALES…

Court:Court of Appeals of Idaho

Date published: May 25, 2023

Citations

No. 50254 (Idaho Ct. App. May. 25, 2023)