State of Idaho v. Adam Levi Fackrell

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 52548 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: December 8, 2025 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED ADAM LEVI FACKRELL, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant. ) ) Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Cassia County. Hon. Blaine Cannon, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and aggregate sentence of twenty-five years with a minimum period of confinement of eight years for two counts of injury to a child and two counts of burglary, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kacey L. Jones, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge ________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Adam Levi Fackrell entered an Alford plea1 to two counts of injury to a child, Idaho Code § 18-1501(1), and two counts of burglary, I.C. § 18-1401. In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court imposed consecutive terms of ten years with eight years determinate for one count of injury to a child, five years indeterminate for the second count of injury to a child, and five years indeterminate for each count of burglary for an aggregate

See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970). sentence of twenty-five years with eight years determinate. Fackrell 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 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). Our role is limited to determining whether reasonable minds could reach the same conclusion as the district court. State v. Biggs, 168 Idaho 112, 116, 480 P.3d 150, 154 (Ct. App. 2020).

Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion. Therefore, Fackrell’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.