From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Schwindt

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Dec 20, 2016
Docket No. 44187 (Idaho Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2016)

Opinion

Docket No. 44187 Docket No. 44188 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 818

12-20-2016

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MICHAEL SCHWINDT, Defendant-Appellant.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, 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THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY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 Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bingham County. Hon. Bruce L. Pickett, District Judge. Judgments of conviction and concurrent unified sentences of twenty-five years with four years determinate and eighteen years with three years determinate for two counts of sexual abuse of a child, affirmed. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge

____________________

PER CURIAM

In this consolidated appeal, Michael Schwindt pled guilty to two counts of sexual abuse of a child, Idaho Code § 18-1506. The district court imposed concurrent unified sentences of twenty-five years with four years determinate and eighteen years with three years determinate. Schwindt appeals, contending that his sentences are 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, Schwindt's judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Schwindt

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Dec 20, 2016
Docket No. 44187 (Idaho Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2016)
Case details for

State v. Schwindt

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MICHAEL SCHWINDT…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Dec 20, 2016

Citations

Docket No. 44187 (Idaho Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2016)