State v. Mehmed Halilovic

• Court: Idaho Court of Appeals
• Decided: January 26, 2016
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43456

STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 339 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: January 26, 2016 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) MEHMED HALILOVIC, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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. Richard D. Greenwood, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and sentence, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds, 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; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge ________________________________________________

PER CURIAM Mehmed Halilovic pleaded guilty to lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under sixteen, felony, Idaho Code § 18-1508. The district court imposed a unified twenty-year sentence, with three years determinate. Halilovic filed an I.C.R. 35 motion, which the district court denied. Halilovic appeals.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. 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

1 Halilovic does not appeal from the denial of his I.C.R. 35 motion. 1 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, Halilovic’s judgment of conviction and sentence is affirmed.