State v. Cory R. Holtan

CourtIdaho Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 1, 2012
StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Cory R. Holtan (State v. Cory R. Holtan) 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. Cory R. Holtan, (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 38870

STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 344 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: February 1, 2012 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) CORY R. HOLTAN, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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, Ada County. Hon. Darla S. Williamson, District Judge.

Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, 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 Cory R. Holtan pled guilty to failure to register as a sex offender. Idaho Code § 18-8309. The district court sentenced Holtan to a unified term of ten years, with one year determinate. Holtan filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied. Holtan appeals. A motion for reduction of sentence under Idaho Criminal Rule 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). Upon review of the

1 record, including the new information submitted with Holtan’s Rule 35 motion, we conclude no abuse of discretion has been shown. Therefore, the district court’s order denying Holtan’s Rule 35 motion is affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Huffman
159 P.3d 838 (Idaho Supreme Court, 2007)
State v. Allbee
771 P.2d 66 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1989)
State v. Knighton
144 P.3d 23 (Idaho Supreme Court, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State v. Cory R. Holtan, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cory-r-holtan-idahoctapp-2012.