Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

State v. Gleese

Court of Appeals of Idaho

October 29, 2013

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

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 726

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. Benjamin R. Simpson, District Judge.

Orders revoking probation and requiring execution of sentences, affirmed

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Brian R. Dickson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Russell J. Spencer, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

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

PER CURIAM

Jeremy Michael Gleese appeals from his judgments of conviction and the district court's orders revoking his probations. Gleese also argues the Idaho Supreme Court denied him due process, equal protection, and effective assistance of counsel in this appeal when it denied his motion to augment the record with certain transcripts of district court proceedings. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE

These cases are consolidated on appeal. In 2004, Jeremy Michael Gleese was convicted of burglary, Idaho Code § 18-1401. The district court withheld judgment and placed Gleese on probation for two years. In 2005, Gleese was charged with burglary, I.C. § 18-1401; aggravated assault, I.C. §§ 18-901, 18-905; and felony malicious injury to property, I.C. § 18-7001, in violation of his probation in the 2004 case. While that matter was pending, Gleese was charged with another burglary. The three cases were consolidated and, pursuant to a plea agreement, Gleese pleaded guilty to three counts of burglary, aggravated assault, and malicious injury to property. The district court imposed concurrent sentences as follows: In the 2004 case, a unified sentence of three and one-half years with one year determinate for burglary. In the first 2005 case, a unified sentence of eight years with two and one-half years determinate for burglary, five years with two years determinate for the aggravated assault, and five years with two years determinate for felony malicious injury to property. In the second 2005 case, a unified sentence of five years with two years determinate for burglary. The district court retained jurisdiction in all three cases. At the conclusion of the retained jurisdiction, the district court suspended the sentences and placed Gleese on probation for five years. A report of probation violation was filed shortly thereafter, and Gleese was placed on a second period of retained jurisdiction. Upon completion of the second retained jurisdiction period, Gleese was returned to probation for two years. In 2011, Gleese admitted to violating several terms of the probation when a new burglary charge was filed. This case was consolidated with the other three, and the district court consequently revoked probation in the 2004 and 2005 cases, and imposed a concurrent five-year sentence with two years determinate in the 2011 case. Gleese timely appeals.

After filing this appeal, and before assignment to this Court, Gleese filed a motion to augment the record and suspend the briefing schedule, requesting that the record on appeal be augmented with various transcripts from the prior probation violation proceedings. The State objected to augmenting the record, and the Idaho Supreme Court denied Gleese's motion. Upon assignment to this Court, Gleese presents three issues: (1) whether the Idaho Supreme Court denied him due process, equal protection, and effective assistance of counsel when it denied his motion to augment the record; (2) whether the district court abused its discretion when it revoked Gleese's probation; and (3) whether the district court abused its discretion when it failed to further reduce the length of Gleese's sentences.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Denial of the Motion to Augment the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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