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 of Idaho v. Justin Shane Dewitt

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO


January 8, 2013

STATE OF IDAHO,
PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
JUSTIN SHANE DEWITT,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

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

Per curiam.

2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 314

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Order relinquishing jurisdiction and imposing reduced sentence of a unified term of ten years, with two years determinate, affirmed.

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

Justin Shane DeWitt pled guilty to lewd conduct with a minor child under sixteen. Idaho Code § 18-1508. The district court sentenced DeWitt to a unified term of ten years, with three years determinate, and retained jurisdiction. DeWitt was sent to participate in the rider program at the North Idaho Correction Institution (NICI), but shortly thereafter, DeWitt was removed from the program due to disciplinary concerns. The district court relinquished jurisdiction and, pursuant to Idaho Criminal Rule 35, reduced DeWitt's sentence to a unified term of ten years, with two years determinate. DeWitt filed a Rule 35 motion for reduction of his sentence, which the district court denied. DeWitt now appeals from the district court's order relinquishing jurisdiction, contending the district court abused its discretion by relinquishing jurisdiction and by failing to further reduce DeWitt's sentence.

The decision to place a defendant on probation or whether, instead, to relinquish jurisdiction over the defendant is a matter within the sound discretion of the district court and will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of that discretion. State v. Hood, 102 Idaho 711, 712, 639 P.2d 9, 10 (1981); State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 205-06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). The record in this case shows the district court properly considered the information before it and determined probation was not appropriate.

Sentencing is also 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.

Accordingly, the district court's order relinquishing jurisdiction and imposing a reduced sentence is affirmed.

20130108

© 1992-2013 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.