Court Opinion

ID: 2643438
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-11-21 19:13:09.493021+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:58.835849
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

                                       Docket No. 40894

STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )     2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 757
                                                 )
       Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )     Filed: November 20, 2013
                                                 )
v.                                               )     Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
                                                 )
JOHN T. COOK,                                    )     THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
                                                 )     OPINION AND SHALL NOT
       Defendant-Appellant.                      )     BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
                                                 )

       Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho,
       Bonner County. Hon. Barbara A. Buchanan, District Judge.

       Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period
       of confinement of three years, for lewd conduct with a minor under the age of
       sixteen, affirmed.

       Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy
       Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

       Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy
       Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
                 ________________________________________________

                     Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge;
                                 and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM
       John T. Cook pled guilty to lewd conduct with a minor under the age of sixteen. Idaho
Code § 18-1508. The district court sentenced Cook to a unified term of ten years, with a
minimum period of confinement of three years. Cook appeals asserting that the district court
abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence.
       Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the
factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and
need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-
15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App.

                                                1
1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (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). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record
in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.
       Therefore, Cook’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.

                                                   2