State v. John Anthony Richter ( 2010 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Docket No. 36740
STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2010 Unpublished Opinion No. 465
)
Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: May 14, 2010
)
v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
)
JOHN ANTHONY RICHTER, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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 Hansen, District Judge.
Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum
period of confinement of five years, for attempted strangulation, affirmed.
Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy
Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy
Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
______________________________________________
Before LANSING, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;
and MELANSON, Judge
PER CURIAM
John Anthony Richter entered an Alford1 plea to attempted strangulation. I.C. § 18-923.
In exchange for his plea, an additional charge was dismissed. The district court sentenced
Richter to a unified term of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years.
Richter 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
See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970).
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, Richter’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
2