Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Matthew Lee Stradley

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO


October 12, 2012

STATE OF IDAHO, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
MATTHEW LEE STRADLEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonner County. Hon. Steven C. Verby, District Judge.

Per curiam.

2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 670

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fourteen years, with two years determinate, for lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen, affirmed.

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and GUTIERREZ, Judge

Matthew Lee Stradley pled guilty to lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen. Idaho Code § 18-1508. The district court sentenced Stradley to a unified term of fourteen years, with two years determinate. Stradley appeals, contending the district court abused its discretion in imposing an excessive sentence and declining to retain jurisdiction.

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).

The decision whether to retain jurisdiction is also a matter within the sound discretion of the district court. State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 205-06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). The primary purpose of a district court retaining jurisdiction is to enable the court to obtain additional information regarding whether the defendant has sufficient rehabilitative potential and is suitable for probation. State v. Jones, 141 Idaho 673, 677, 115 P.3d 764, 768 (Ct. App. 2005). There can be no abuse of discretion if the district court has sufficient evidence before it to conclude that the defendant is not a suitable candidate for probation. Id.

Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion either in sentencing or in declining to retain jurisdiction. Therefore, Stradley's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.

20121012

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.