STATE v. PETREE, 40189 (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals of Idaho
Number: inidco20130506125
Visitors: 9
Filed: May 06, 2013
Latest Update: May 06, 2013
Summary: THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY PER CURIAM. Ricky Petree pled guilty to attempted strangulation. Idaho Code 18-923. The district court sentenced Petree to a unified term of fifteen years, with ten years determinate, but retained jurisdiction. After a period of retained jurisdiction, the district court relinquished its jurisdiction. Petree filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reconsideration of his sentence and relinquishment of jurisdiction, which the
Summary: THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY PER CURIAM. Ricky Petree pled guilty to attempted strangulation. Idaho Code 18-923. The district court sentenced Petree to a unified term of fifteen years, with ten years determinate, but retained jurisdiction. After a period of retained jurisdiction, the district court relinquished its jurisdiction. Petree filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reconsideration of his sentence and relinquishment of jurisdiction, which the ..
More
THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
PER CURIAM.
Ricky Petree pled guilty to attempted strangulation. Idaho Code § 18-923. The district court sentenced Petree to a unified term of fifteen years, with ten years determinate, but retained jurisdiction. After a period of retained jurisdiction, the district court relinquished its jurisdiction. Petree filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reconsideration of his sentence and relinquishment of jurisdiction, which the district court denied. Petree appeals.
A motion for reduction of sentence under Rule 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). An appeal from the denial of a Rule 35 motion cannot be used as a vehicle to review the underlying sentence absent the presentation of new information. Id. Because no new or additional information in support of Petree's Rule 35 motion was presented, the district court did not abuse its discretion. For the foregoing reasons, the district court's order denying Petree's Rule 35 motion is affirmed.
Source: Leagle
