IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 42615 STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 573 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: July 29, 2015 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) JEREMY JAMES CARPENTER, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant. ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY ) Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Minidoka County. Hon. Michael R. Crabtree, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and concurrent, indeterminate sentences of five years for felony eluding and possession of methamphetamine, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Sally J. Cooley, 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 GRATTON, Judge ________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Jeremy James Carpenter pled guilty to felony eluding, Idaho Code § 49-1404(2)(a), and possession of methamphetamine, I.C. § 37-2732(c)(1). In exchange for his guilty pleas, additional charges were dismissed. The district court imposed concurrent, indeterminate sentences of five years. Carpenter 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 need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014- (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, Carpenter’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.