State v. Mathew Allen Welch ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
    Docket No. 43248
    STATE OF IDAHO,                                 )   2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 411
    )
    Plaintiff-Respondent,                    )   Filed: March 2, 2016
    )
    v.                                              )   Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk
    )
    MATTTHEW ALLEN WELCH,                           )   THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
    )   OPINION AND SHALL NOT
    Defendant-Appellant.                     )   BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
    )
    Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho,
    Kootenai County. Hon. Lansing L. Haynes, District Judge.
    Judgment of conviction and sentences, affirmed.
    Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, 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 HUSKEY, Judge
    ________________________________________________
    PER CURIAM
    Matthew Allen Welch pled guilty to one count of trafficking in methamphetamine or
    amphetamine, felony, 
    Idaho Code § 37-2732
    (B)(4) and two counts of delivery of a controlled
    substance, felony, 
    Idaho Code § 37-2732
    (a). The district court imposed a unified fifteen-year
    sentence, with five years determinate, for the trafficking in methamphetamine or amphetamine
    and a unified fifteen-year sentence, with five years determinate, for each delivery of a controlled
    substance charge. All sentences were imposed concurrently. Welch appeals, contending that his
    sentences are excessive.
    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, Welch’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.
    2
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 3/2/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021