1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket Nos. 44508/44509

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

FRANCISCO JAVIER LOPEZ ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 437

Filed: April 18, 2017

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonneville County. Hon. Bruce L. Pickett , District Judge.

Order revoking probation, executing original sentence without reduction, affirmed

. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Brian R. Dickson , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lo ri A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and HUSKEY, J udge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM In these consolidated appeals, Francisco J avier Lopez pled guilty to unlawful discharge
of a firearm at an occupied vehicle (Docket No. 44508)

, and possession of a controlled substance
with intent to deliver (Docket No. 44509) . Idaho C ode § § 18

- 3317, 37

- 2732(a)(1)(A)

. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. T he district court sentenced
Lopez to concurrent unified terms of twelve years with two years determinate in the unlawful
discharge case; and eight years with two years determinate in the possession case. Lopez filed
an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for a reduction of sentence in each case, b oth of which the
district court granted by retaining jurisdiction. Following the period of retained jurisdiction, the2 district court suspended Lopez’s sentences and placed him on supervised probation for a period of six years. Lopez admitted to various p robation violations and the district court again retained
jurisdiction, thereafter placing Lopez on probation. Subsequently, Lopez admitted to violating the terms of the probation, and the district court consequently revoked probation and ordered

ex ecution of the original sentences without reduction

. Lopez appeals, contending that the district

court abused its discretion by declining to reduce his sentences upon revoking probation.
The court may, after a probation violation has been established, o rder 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). When w e review a sentence that is ordered into execution
following a period of probation, we will examine the entire record encompassing events before and after the original judgment. State v. Hanington , 148 Idaho 26, 29, 218 P.3d 5, 8 (Ct. App.
2009). We base our review upon the facts existing when the sentence was imposed as well as events occurring between the original sentencing and the revocation of probation. Id. Thus, this
Court will consider the elements of the record before the trial court that are p roperly made part of
the record on appeal and are relevant to the defendant’s contention that the trial court should
have reduced the sentence upon revocation of probation. Morgan , 153 Idaho at 621, 288 P.3d at

838.
Applying the foregoing standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion in ordering execution of Lopez ’s sentences
without modification. Therefore, the order s revoking probation and directing execution of
Lopez ’s previous ly suspended sentence s are affirmed.