State v. Saxey

• Decision Date: 01 December 2022
• Docket Number: 49484
• Parties: STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STEPHEN J. SAXEY, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Idaho Court of Appeals

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STEPHEN J. SAXEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 49484

Court of Appeals of Idaho

December 1, 2022

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Jonathan Medema, District Judge.

Order revoking probation, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kiley A Heffner, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

Before LORELLO, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge; and BRAILSFORD, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Stephen J. Saxey pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance. I.C. § 37-2732(c). In exchange for his guilty plea additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced Saxey to a unified term of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years, but suspended the sentence and placed Saxey on probation. Subsequently, Saxey admitted to violating the terms of the probation, and the district court consequently revoked probation but retained jurisdiction. Following completion of Saxey's rider, the district court again placed him on probation. Thereafter, Saxey again violated the terms of his probation. The district court revoked Saxey's probation and ordered execution of the original sentence. Saxey appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in revoking probation.

It is within the trial court's discretion to revoke probation if any of the terms and conditions of the probation have been violated. I.C. §§ 19-2603, 20-222; State v Beckett, 122 Idaho 324, 325, 834 P.2d 326, 327 (Ct. App. 1992); State v. Adams, 115 Idaho 1053, 1054, 772 P.2d 260, 261 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Hass, 114 Idaho 554, 558, 758 P.2d 713, 717 (Ct. App. 1988). In determining whether to revoke probation a court must examine whether the probation is achieving the goal of rehabilitation and consistent with the protection of society. State v. Upton, 127 Idaho 274, 275, 899 P.2d 984, 985 (Ct. App. 1995); Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; Hass, 114 Idaho at 558, 758 P.2d at 717. The court may, after a probation violation has been established, order that the suspended sentence be executed or, in the alternative, the court is authorized under I.C.R. 35 to reduce the sentence. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; State v. Marks, 116 Idaho 976, 977, 783 P.2d 315, 316 (Ct. App. 1989). The court may also order a period of retained jurisdiction. State v. Urrabazo, 150 Idaho 158, 162, 244 P.3d 1244, 1248 (2010). A decision to revoke probation will be disturbed on appeal only upon a showing that the trial court abused its discretion. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327. In reviewing the propriety of a probation revocation, the focus of the inquiry is the conduct underlying the trial court's decision to revoke probation. State v. Morgan, 153 Idaho 618,...