Court Opinion

ID: 881444
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-06-05 00:44:07.07704+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:55.290876
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

                                       Docket No. 38762

STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )     2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 529
                                                 )
       Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )     Filed: June 21, 2012
                                                 )
v.                                               )     Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
                                                 )
AUSTIN BYRON COURSER,                            )     THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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. Steven C. Verby, District Judge.

       Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum
       period of confinement of five years, for sexual abuse of a child under the age of
       sixteen years, affirmed.

       Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Sarah E. Tompkins, Deputy
       Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

       Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney
       General, Boise, for respondent.
                 ________________________________________________

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

PER CURIAM
       Austin Byron Courser pled guilty to sexual abuse of a child under the age of sixteen
years. Idaho Code § 18-1506. The district court sentenced Courser to a unified term of fifteen
years, with five years determinate. Courser appeals.
       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.
1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

                                                1
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, Courser’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.

                                                   2