Filed: Aug. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2014
Summary: THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY PER CURIAM. Adam Andrew Nelson was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance, I.C. 37-2732(c), and being a persistent violator, I.C. 19-2514. The district court sentenced Nelson to a unified term of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, enhanced by an additional indeterminate term of eight years for being a persistent violator. The district court ordered that Nelson's sentence run conc
Summary: THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY PER CURIAM. Adam Andrew Nelson was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance, I.C. 37-2732(c), and being a persistent violator, I.C. 19-2514. The district court sentenced Nelson to a unified term of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, enhanced by an additional indeterminate term of eight years for being a persistent violator. The district court ordered that Nelson's sentence run concu..
More
THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
PER CURIAM.
Adam Andrew Nelson was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance, I.C. § 37-2732(c), and being a persistent violator, I.C. § 19-2514. The district court sentenced Nelson to a unified term of seven years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, enhanced by an additional indeterminate term of eight years for being a persistent violator. The district court ordered that Nelson's sentence run concurrent with other unrelated sentences. Nelson appeals.1
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. 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, Nelson's judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
