State of Idaho v. Jared Thomas Leighliter

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 51419

STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: March 17, 2025 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED JARED THOMAS LEIGHLITER, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant. ) )

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonner County. Hon. Susie Jensen, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of incarceration of two years, for felony fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Elizabeth H. Estess, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge ________________________________________________

PER CURIAM Jared Thomas Leighliter was found guilty of felony fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, Idaho Code § 49-1404(2), and misdemeanor resisting or obstructing police officers, I.C. § 18-705. For the felony fleeing or attempting to elude conviction, the district court imposed a unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of incarceration of two years, and for the misdemeanor resisting or obstructing conviction, the district court ordered credit for time served. Leighliter appeals, contending that his sentence is excessive, and the district court abused its discretion by not retaining jurisdiction.

1 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). That discretion includes the trial court’s decision regarding whether to retain jurisdiction. I.C. § 19-2601(3), (4); State v. Reber, 138 Idaho 275, 278, 61 P.3d 632, 635 (Ct. App. 2002); State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 205- 06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). The record in this case shows that the district court properly considered the information before it and determined that retaining jurisdiction was not appropriate. Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion. Therefore, Leighliter’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.