Court Opinion

ID: 4161109
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-04-18 19:06:13.201208+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:22:50.763693
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

                                        Docket No. 44570

STATE OF IDAHO,                                 )   2017 Unpublished Opinion No. 436
                                                )
       Plaintiff-Respondent,                    )   Filed: April 18, 2017
                                                )
v.                                              )   Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
                                                )
IVAN DEAN SMITH,                                )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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,
       Valley County. Hon. Jason D. Scott, District Judge.

       Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum
       period of confinement of two years, for aggravated assault, affirmed.

       Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred,
       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
       Ivan Dean Smith pled guilty to aggravated assault. I.C. §§ 18-901 and 18-905(b). In
exchange for his guilty plea, an additional charge that he was a persistent violator was dismissed.
The district court sentenced Smith to a unified term of five years, with a minimum period of
confinement of two years. Smith 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-

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

                                                   2