State of Idaho v. Mary Ayleah Zurcher

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 52925 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: March 20, 2026 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED MARY AYLEAH ZURCHER, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant. ) ) Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Benewah County. Hon. Barbara Duggan, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of six years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for aggravated driving under the influence, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C. Swinford, Deputy Appellate Public Defender; Katherine C. Ball and Juliet Hernandez, University of Idaho Legal Aid Clinic, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kacey L. Jones, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________ Before TRIBE, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge ________________________________________________ PER CURIAM Mary Ayleah Zurcher pled guilty to aggravated driving under the influence. I.C. § 18- 8006. In exchange for her guilty plea, an additional charge was dismissed. The district court sentenced Zurcher to a unified term of six years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years. Zurcher appeals, arguing that her 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, Zurcher’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.