State v. Damian Lopez-Suazo

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 41786 STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 338 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: February 10, 2015 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) DAMIAN LOPEZ-SUAZO, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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. Timothy L. Hansen, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, for trafficking in methamphetamine, affirmed. Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Sally J. Cooley, 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 Damian Lopez-Suazo was found guilty of trafficking in methamphetamine. I.C. § 37- 2732B(a)(4). The district court sentenced Lopez-Suazo to a unified term of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, to run consecutive to another unrelated sentence in Nevada. Lopez-Suazo filed an I.C.R 35 motion, which the district court denied. Lopez-Suazo appeals. 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 1 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, Lopez-Suazo’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed. 2