Court Opinion

ID: 2620532
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-10-31 17:39:26.856623+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:09.134540
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

                                       Docket No. 40917

STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )     2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 733
                                                 )
       Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )     Filed: October 31, 2013
                                                 )
v.                                               )     Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
                                                 )
BRIAN TIMOTHY MACK,                              )     THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
                                                 )     OPINION AND SHALL NOT
       Defendant-Appellant.                      )     BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
                                                 )

       Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada
       County. Hon. Deborah A. Bail, District Judge.

       Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with five years
       determinate, for robbery, affirmed.

       Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, 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; LANSING, Judge;
                                 and GRATTON, Judge

PER CURIAM
       Brian Timothy Mack pled guilty to robbery. Idaho Code §§ 18-6501, 18-6502, 18-204.
The district court sentenced Mack to a unified term of fifteen years, with five years determinate.
Mack appeals, contending his sentence is excessive.
       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
the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho
1
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, Mack’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.

                                                   2