State v. Anderson

Idaho Court of Appeals

State v. Anderson

667 P.2d 275, 105 Idaho 172, 1983 Ida. App. LEXIS 247

CourtIdaho Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 27, 1983

DocketNo. 14806

StatusPublished

This text of 667 P.2d 275 (State v. Anderson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Anderson, 667 P.2d 275, 105 Idaho 172, 1983 Ida. App. LEXIS 247 (Idaho Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Donald Anderson appeals from an indeterminate ten year sentence to the custody of the state Board of Correction, imposed upon a conviction for robbery. The sole issue is whether the sentence was an abuse of the district court’s sentencing discretion.

Anderson plead guilty to the robbery of a commercial establishment in Twin Falls, Idaho. He displayed a firearm in committing the crime. The presentence report shows that he had served sentences of incarceration for a number of felony and misdemeanor offenses. Having reviewed the full record and having considered the sentence review criteria set forth in State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 650 P.2d 707 (Ct.App.1982), we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. The sentence is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Donald Anderson appeals from an indeterminate ten year sentence to the custody of the state Board of Correction, imposed upon a conviction for robbery. The sole issue is whether the sentence was an abuse of the district court’s sentencing discretion.

Anderson plead guilty to the robbery of a commercial establishment in Twin Falls, Idaho. He displayed a firearm in committing the crime. The presentence report shows that he had served sentences of incarceration for a number of felony and misdemeanor offenses. Having reviewed the full record and having considered the sentence review criteria set forth in State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 650 P.2d 707 (Ct.App.1982), we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. The sentence is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

667 P.2d 275, 105 Idaho 172, 1983 Ida. App. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-anderson-idahoctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack