1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 45777

STATE OF IDAHO ,
Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

AXYN TAGGART PROW ,
Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: September 18, 2018
Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Deborah A. Bail , District Judge.
Order revoking probation
, affirmed

. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds
, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Axyn Taggart Prow pled guilty to aggravated assault
, Idaho Code § § 18

- 901(b), 18

- 905(b) , pursuant to an Alford 1 plea

. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were
dismissed. The district court sentenc ed Prow to a unified term of five years with two years
determinate
, but following a period of retained jurisdiction , s uspe nded the sentence and placed
Prow on supervised probation for a period of five years . Subsequently, Prow admitted to violating the terms of the probation, and the district court consequently revoked probation and

1 See North Carolina v. Alford , 400 U.S. 25 (1970).2 ordered execution of the original sentence

. Prow appeals, contending that the district court
abused its d iscretion in revoking probation

. It is within th e trial court’s discretion to revoke probation if any of the terms and conditions of the probation have been violated. I.C. §§ 19

- 2603, 20

- 222; State v. Beckett , 122 Idaho 324, 325, 834 P.2d 326, 327 (Ct. App. 1992); State v. Adams , 115 Idaho 1053, 1054, 772 P.2d 260, 261 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Hass , 114 Idaho 554, 558, 758 P.2d 713, 717 (Ct. App. 1988). In determining whether to revoke probation a court must examine whether the probation is achieving the goal of rehabilitation and consistent with the protection of society. State v. Upton , 127 Idaho 274, 275, 899 P.2d 984, 985 (Ct. App. 1995); Beckett , 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; Hass , 114 Idaho at 558, 758 P.2d at 717. The court may, after a probation violation has been established, order that the suspended sentence be executed or, in the alternative, the
court is authorized under I.C.R. 35 to reduce the sentence. Beckett , 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; State v. Marks , 116 Idaho 976, 977, 783 P.2d 315, 316 (Ct. App. 1989). The court may a lso order a period of retained jurisdiction. I.C. § 19

- 2601. A decision to revoke probation will be disturbed on appeal only upon a showing that the trial court abused its discretion. Beckett , 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327. In reviewing the proprie ty of a probation revocation, the focus of the inquiry is the conduct underlying the trial court’s decision to revoke probation. State v. Morgan , 153 Idaho 618, 621, 288 P.3d 835, 838 (Ct. App. 2012). Thus, this Court will consider
the elements of the re cord before the trial court relevant to the revocation of probation issues which are properly made part of the record on appeal. Id

. Applying the foregoing standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abuse d its discretion in revok ing probation . Therefore, the order revoking probation and directing execution of Prow ’s previously suspended sentence is affir med.