1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 42612

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JOSEPH JACKSON BAXTER,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 710

Filed: November 16, 2015

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Twin 

Falls County. Hon. Randy J. Stoker, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and sentence; and order relinquishing jurisdiction, 

affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Reed P. Anderson, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Joseph Jackson Baxter pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance, 

methamphetamine, Idaho Code § 37-2732(c)(1). The district court imposed a unified ten-year 

sentence, with three years determinate, and retained jurisdiction. After sentencing while 

awaiting transport from the local jail to the Idaho Department of Correction, but prior to 

participating in the retained jurisdiction program, Baxter received new drug-related criminal 

charges. The State motioned the district court to relinquish jurisdiction. Following a hearing, 

the district court relinquished jurisdiction. Baxter appeals. He also argues that the district court 
2

abused its discretion by relinquishing jurisdiction and, in the alternative to vacating the order 

relinquishing jurisdiction, moves this Court to reduce his underlying sentence.

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 after sentence was imposed, but while 

still in the local jail awaiting transportation, Baxter smoked marijuana and ingested hydrocodone 

pills. This demonstrates Baxter’s lack of amenability to rehabilitation. The district court 

properly considered the information before it and determined that neither retained jurisdiction 

nor probation were appropriate. We hold that Baxter has failed to show that the district court 

abused its discretion in relinquishing jurisdiction.

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). 

Baxter argues that all of the relevant goals of sentencing could have been accomplished 

with completion of retained jurisdiction and probation. As noted above, however, the district 

court found that neither were an appropriate course of action in Baxter’s case. Further, the 

record does not indicate that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing. 

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

affirmed.