State v. David Lee Kelley

Court: Idaho Court of Appeals
Date filed: 2012-03-30
Citations:
Copy Citations
Click to Find Citing Cases
Combined Opinion
               IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

                                       Docket No. 38837

STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )     2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 423
                                                 )
       Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )     Filed: March 30, 2012
                                                 )
v.                                               )     Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
                                                 )
DAVID LEE KELLEY,                                )     THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
                                                 )     OPINION AND SHALL NOT
       Defendant-Appellant.                      )     BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
                                                 )

       Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho,
       Canyon County. Hon. Gregory M. Culet, District Judge.

       Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period
       of confinement of five years, for felony driving under the influence of alcohol,
       affirmed.

       Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy
       Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

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

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

PER CURIAM
       David Lee Kelley pled guilty to felony driving under the influence of alcohol. Idaho
Code § 18-8004, 18-8005. The district court sentenced Kelley to a unified term of ten years,
with a minimum period of confinement of five years. Kelley 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-
15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App.



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




                                                   2