State v. Michael Allen Pasborg

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 42765

STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 611 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: September 2, 2015 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) MICHAEL ALLEN PASBORG, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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 five years with two years determinate for eluding a peace officer and driving without privileges, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Reed P. Anderson, 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 GRATTON, Judge ________________________________________________

Michael Allen Pasborg was found guilty of eluding a peace officer, Idaho Code § 49- 1404(2) and driving without privileges, I.C. § 18-8001. The district court sentenced Pasborg to a unified term of five years with two years determinate to run consecutively to a previous sentence. Pasborg appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence. 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-

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