706 P.2d 85 (Idaho App. 1985), 15844, State v. Beltran

Docket Nº:15844.
Citation:706 P.2d 85, 109 Idaho 196
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM.
Party Name:STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Demetrio BELTRAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Attorney:Michael E. Powers, Twin Falls, for defendant-appellant. Jim Jones, Atty. Gen., Lynn E. Thomas, Sol. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.
Case Date:August 30, 1985
Court:Court of Appeals of Idaho
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 85

706 P.2d 85 (Idaho App. 1985)

109 Idaho 196

STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

Demetrio BELTRAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15844.

Court of Appeals of Idaho.

August 30, 1985

Michael E. Powers, Twin Falls, for defendant-appellant.

Jim Jones, Atty. Gen., Lynn E. Thomas, Sol. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Demetrio Beltran pled guilty to voluntary manslaughter. The district court sentenced him to a determinate term of fifteen years in the custody of the Board of Correction. The sole issue on appeal is whether the maximum penalty of fifteen years was excessive and represents an abuse of

Page 86

[109 Idaho 197] sentencing discretion by the district court. We affirm.

Our standards for sentence review are well-settled. The trial court possesses discretionary authority to determine an appropriate sentence. A sentence within the statutory maximum will not be disturbed on appeal unless a clear abuse of sentencing discretion is shown. State v. Delin, 102 Idaho 151, 627 P.2d 330 (1981); State v. Adams, 106 Idaho 309, 678 P.2d 101 (Ct.App.1984); State v. Miller, 105 Idaho 838, 673 P.2d 438 (Ct.App.1983). A sentence may represent an abuse of discretion if it is shown to be unreasonable when viewed in light of the facts of the case. State v. Nice, 103 Idaho 89, 645 P.2d 323 (1982). A sentence of imprisonment is reasonable, if it appears at the time of sentencing, that confinement is necessary "to accomplish the primary objective of protecting society and to achieve any or all of the related goals of deterrence, rehabilitation or retribution applicable to a given case." State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct.App.1982).

Beltran received the maximum term of confinement authorized by statute for voluntary manslaughter. I.C. § 18-4007. His fixed sentence must be served entirely in confinement and Beltran is not eligible for parole. However, the actual term of his confinement may be reduced to ten years for his good conduct while in custody. Idaho Code § 20-101A authorizes the reduction of sentences for good conduct as a matter of right to inmates who faithfully observe the rules of the correctional institution. See State v. Miller, 105 Idaho at 840, 673 P.2d at 440. As we have previously noted, for the purpose of appellate review the duration of confinement for a fixed sentence will be the term of the sentence less the good...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP