Idaho Court of Appeals, 2016

State v. Dustin Jack Howell

State v. Dustin Jack Howell
Idaho Court of Appeals · Decided September 19, 2016

State v. Dustin Jack Howell

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 43731 STATE OF IDAHO, ) 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 694 ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Filed: September 19, 2016 ) v. ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk ) DUSTIN JACK HOWELL, ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT Defendant-Appellant.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. Deborah A. Bail, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of one year, for battery on a police officer or sheriff, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C.

Swinford, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________ Before GUTIERREZ, Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge ________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Dustin Jack Howell was found guilty of battery on a police officer or sheriff, Idaho Code §§ 18-915(a), 903(a). The district court imposed a unified five-year sentence, with one year determinate. Howell appeals, contending that his sentence is 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.

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, Howell’s judgment of conviction and sentence is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.