Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Patrick H. Owen, District Judge.
2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 631
THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
OPINION AND SHALL NOT
BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of eight years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years, for burglary, affirmed; order denying
I.C.R. 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed.
Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge
Rosa Reyes pled guilty to burglary. I.C. §§ 18-1401, 18-204. In exchange for her guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Reyes to a unified term of eight years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years. Reyes filed an I.C.R 35 motion, which the district court denied. Reyes 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. 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.
Next, we review whether the district court erred in denying Reyes's
Rule 35 motion. A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is
essentially a plea for leniency, addressed to the sound discretion of
the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 23, 24
(2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App.
1989). In presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that
the sentence is excessive in light of new or additional information
subsequently provided to the district court in support of the motion.
State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). In
conducting our review of the grant or denial of a Rule 35 motion, we
consider the entire record and apply the same criteria used for
determining the reasonableness of the original sentence. State v.
Forde, 113 Idaho 21, 22, 740
P.2d 63, 64 (Ct. App. 1987); Lopez, 106 Idaho at 449-51, 680 P.2d at
871-73. Upon review of the record, we conclude no abuse of discretion
has been shown.
Therefore, Reyes's judgment of conviction and sentence, and the district court's order denying Reyes's Rule 35 motion, are affirmed.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...