1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 44980

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

BLAISE TROMBETTI,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 623

Filed: October 24, 2017

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Canyon County. Hon. Davis F. Vandervelde, District Judge. 

Order relinquishing jurisdiction and executing underlying sentence, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kimberly A. Coster, 

Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy 

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Blaise Trombetti pleaded guilty to felony domestic battery with traumatic injury, Idaho 

Code §§ 18-903(a), 18-918(2). The district court imposed a unified ten-year sentence, with four 

year determinate. The district court retained jurisdiction, and Trombetti was sent to participate in 

the rider program. After Trombetti participated in the rider program for a couple of months and 

based upon a letter from the Idaho Department of Correction and an amended presentence 

investigation report, the district court relinquished jurisdiction. Trombetti filed an Idaho 

Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied. Trombetti appeals, claiming that the 

district court erred by refusing to grant probation. He also argues his sentence is excessive and 

constitutes an abuse of discretion.
2

We note that 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 that the district court properly considered the 

information before it and determined that probation was not appropriate. We hold that Trombetti

has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion in relinquishing jurisdiction.

Trombetti also contends that his sentence is excessive and constitutes an abuse of 

discretion. Sentences are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Our appellate standard of review 

and the factors to be considered when evaluating the reasonableness of a sentence are wellestablished. State v. Burdett, 134 Idaho 271, 1 P.3d 299 (Ct. App. 2000); State v. Sanchez, 115 

Idaho 776, 769 P.2d 1148 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Reinke, 103 Idaho 771, 653 P.2d 1183 (Ct. 

App. 1982); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 650 P.2d 707 (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). Trombetti argues that all of the relevant goals of sentencing 

could have been accomplished with probation. As noted above, however, the district court found 

that probation was not an appropriate course of action in Trombetti’s case. The record does not 

indicate that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing. 

The order of the district court relinquishing jurisdiction and Trombetti’s sentence are 

affirmed.