State v. Justin Lee Pedersen

• Court: Idaho Court of Appeals
• Decided: August 21, 2014
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 41627

STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 688 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: August 21, 2014 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) JUSTIN LEE PEDERSEN, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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. Deborah A. Bail, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for felony intimidating, impeding, influencing, or preventing the attendance of a witness, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Sally J. Cooley, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________

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

PER CURIAM Justin Lee Pedersen pled guilty to felony intimidating, impeding, influencing, or preventing the attendance of a witness. I.C. § 18-2604(3). In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges and an allegation that Pedersen was a persistent violator were dismissed. The district court sentenced Pedersen to a unified term of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years. The district court retained jurisdiction and sent Pedersen to participate in the rider program. Pedersen appeals, asserting that his sentence is excessive. 1

1 Pedersen also pled guilty to misdemeanor attempted no-contact order. However, he does not challenge this judgment of conviction or sentence on appeal.

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). 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, Pedersen’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.