Opinion ID: 1196528
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: analysis

Text: One of the issues raised by Shiloff on appeal was the legality of his two-to-seven year sentence for fraudulent use of a financial transaction card. Shiloff asserted that this sentence was illegal because the maximum sentence of incarceration for that crime is five years in prison. I.C. § 18-3127. In his reply brief, Shiloff withdrew this issue from consideration, noting that the issue had since been raised on motion to the district court and the district court had corrected the error, reducing the maximum term of confinement on that sentence to a period of five years. Thus, only two issues remain for this Court to decide: (1) whether Shiloff's sentences constitute an abuse of the district court's discretion; and (2) whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Shiloff's motions to reduce the sentences.