State v. Willard

Full title: STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MATTHEW SCOTT WILLARD…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Date published: Jul 12, 2013

Docket No. 40594 (Idaho Ct. App. Jul. 12, 2013)

Opinion

Docket No. 40594 2013 Unpublished Opinion No. 578

07-12-2013

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MATTHEW SCOTT WILLARD, Defendant-Appellant.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben Patrick McGreevy, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

PER CURIAM

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bannock County. Hon. Stephen S. Dunn, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years, for driving under the influence or alcohol and/or drugs, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben Patrick McGreevy, 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

Matthew Scott Willard pled guilty to driving under the influence or alcohol and/or drugs, a repeated offense. Idaho Code §§ 18-8004, 18-8005(9). The district court sentenced Willard to a unified term of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years. Willard 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. 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, Willard's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.