State v. Matthew Edward McGraw

• Court: Idaho Court of Appeals
• Decided: May 20, 2015
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 42453

STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 495 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: May 20, 2015 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) MATTHEW EDWARD McGRAW, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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. Melissa Moody, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fourteen years indeterminate for grand theft, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Ben P. McGreevy, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

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

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

PER CURIAM Matthew Edward McGraw was found guilty of grand theft, Idaho Code §§ 18-2403(1), 18-2407(1)(b), 18-2409, and misdemeanor charges of: providing false information to law enforcement, I.C. § 18-5412(2); illegal consumption of alcohol, I.C. § 23-949; and malicious injury to property, I.C. § 18-7001(1). The district court sentenced McGraw to an indeterminate fourteen years for grand theft and concurrent sentences with credit for time served on each of the misdemeanor charges. McGraw appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence and by declining to place him on probation.

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, McGraw’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.