State v. William Jacob Medley ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 37291
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                  )      2011 Unpublished Opinion No. 333
    )
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                     )      Filed: January 26, 2011
    )
    v.                                               )      Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
    )
    WILLIAM JACOB MEDLEY,                            )      THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED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. Michael E. Wetherell, District Judge.
    Order revoking probation and requiring execution of unified ten-year sentence,
    with four-year determinate term, for felony domestic violence, affirmed.
    Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy
    Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
    Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Jessica M. Lorello, Deputy
    Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.
    ______________________________________________
    Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;
    and GUTIERREZ, Judge
    PER CURIAM
    William Jacob Medley pled guilty to felony domestic violence. I.C. § 18-903, 18-918(2).
    In exchange for his guilty plea, a charge of attempted strangulation was dismissed. The district
    court imposed a unified ten-year sentence, with a four-year determinate term, suspended the
    sentence and placed Medley on probation. Medley thereafter admitted to violating the terms of
    the probation, and the district court revoked probation, ordered execution of the sentence, and
    retained jurisdiction. Medley successfully completed his rider, and the district court again placed
    Medley on probation. Subsequently, Medley admitted to violating the terms of the probation,
    and the district court consequently revoked probation and ordered execution of the original
    1
    sentence. Medley appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in revoking
    probation and that the sentence is excessive.
    It is within the trial court’s discretion to revoke probation if any of the terms and
    conditions of the probation have been violated. I.C. §§ 19-2603, 20-222; State v. Beckett, 
    122 Idaho 324
    , 325, 
    834 P.2d 326
    , 327 (Ct. App. 1992); State v. Adams, 
    115 Idaho 1053
    , 1054, 
    772 P.2d 260
    , 261 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Hass, 
    114 Idaho 554
    , 558, 
    758 P.2d 713
    , 717 (Ct. App.
    1988). In determining whether to revoke probation a court must examine whether the probation
    is achieving the goal of rehabilitation and consistent with the protection of society. State v.
    Upton, 
    127 Idaho 274
    , 275, 
    899 P.2d 984
    , 985 (Ct. App. 1995); Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834
    P.2d at 327; Hass, 114 Idaho at 558, 758 P.2d at 717. The court may, after a probation violation
    has been established, order that the suspended sentence be executed or, in the alternative, the
    court is authorized under Idaho Criminal Rule 35 to reduce the sentence. Beckett, 122 Idaho at
    326, 834 P.2d at 328; State v. Marks, 
    116 Idaho 976
    , 977, 
    783 P.2d 315
    , 316 (Ct. App. 1989). A
    decision to revoke probation will be disturbed on appeal only upon a showing that the trial court
    abused its discretion. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 326, 834 P.2d at 328.
    Sentencing is also a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review
    and the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of a 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. 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).
    When we review a sentence that is ordered into execution following a period of
    probation, we will examine the entire record encompassing events before and after the original
    judgment. State v. Hanington, 
    148 Idaho 26
    , 29, 
    218 P.3d 5
    , 8 (Ct. App. 2009). We base our
    review upon the facts existing when the sentence was imposed as well as events occurring
    between the original sentencing and the revocation of probation. 
    Id.
    Applying the foregoing standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot
    say that the district court abused its discretion either in revoking probation or in ordering
    execution of Medley’s original sentence without modification. Therefore, the order revoking
    probation and directing execution of Medley’s previously suspended sentence is affirmed.
    2
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 1/26/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014