State v. Brown

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 46660

STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: June 18, 2019 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED CHARLES CLIFFORD BROWN, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant. ) )

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. Benjamin R. Simpson, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years, for delivery of a controlled substance, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C. Swinford, 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; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge ________________________________________________

PER CURIAM Charles Clifford Brown pled guilty to delivery of a controlled substance. I.C. § 37- 2732(a)(1)(A). In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Brown to a unified term of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of four years. Brown appeals, arguing that 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

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