State v. Gabriel L. Baker

• Court: Idaho Court of Appeals
• Decided: November 13, 2012
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 39544

STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 713 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: November 13, 2012 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) GABRIEL L. BAKER, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant. ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY )

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Lincoln County. Hon. John K. Butler, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of eight years, for conspiracy to commit burglary, affirmed.

Stephen D. Thompson, Ketchum, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM Gabriel L. Baker pled guilty to conspiracy to commit burglary. Idaho Code §§ 18-1401, 18-1701. The district court sentenced Baker to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of eight years. Baker appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence. Baker is estopped to complain of the sentence he stipulated to. State v. Leyva, 117 Idaho 462, 465, 788 P.2d 863, 866 (Ct. App. 1990). Moreover, 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,

1 650 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, Baker’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.