IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 45869 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: October 30, 2018 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED JACK ALLEN WRIGLEY, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant. ) ) 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 ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for abuse, exploitation or neglect of a vulnerable adult and a concurrent indeterminate term of five years for intimidating, impeding, influencing, or preventing the attendance of a witness, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge ________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Jack Allen Wrigley pled guilty to abuse, exploitation or neglect of a vulnerable adult, I.C.

§ 18-1505(1), and intimidating, impeding, influencing, or preventing the attendance of a witness, I.C. § 18-2604. In exchange for his guilty pleas, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Wrigley to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for abuse, exploitation or neglect of a vulnerable adult and a concurrent indeterminate

term of five years for intimidating, impeding, influencing, or preventing the attendance of a witness. Wrigley appeals, contending 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, Wrigley’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.