State of Idaho v. Jazmyne Mylece Taylor

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 50082

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: April 6, 2023
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
JAZMYNE MYLECE TAYLOR, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT
) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Defendant-Appellant. )
)

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho,
Kootenai County. Hon. Scott Wayman, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction, sentence, and lifetime absolute driver’s license suspension,
affirmed.

Silvey Law Office LTD; Greg S. Silvey, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney
General, Boise, for respondent.
________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Judge; HUSKEY, Judge;
and BRAILSFORD, Judge
________________________________________________

PER CURIAM
Jazmyne Mylece Taylor pled guilty to vehicular manslaughter Idaho Code § 18-4006(3)(b).
The district court imposed a sentence of ten years with a minimum period of incarceration of four
years. The court also absolutely suspended Taylor’s driving privileges for her lifetime. Taylor
appeals, contending that her sentence and the lifetime driving privileges suspension 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-
15 (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

1
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).
During the sentencing hearing, the district court recognized that I.C. § 18-4007(e) gives
the court discretion regarding whether and for how long a driver’s license should be suspended,
and that the length of the suspension was dependent upon the facts and circumstances of each
individual defendant and case. The district court referenced the fact that Taylor’s actions caused
a death and then said it found a lifetime suspension of the driver’s license was appropriate under
the totality of the circumstances.
Applying the above standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say
that the district court abused its discretion in imposing the sentence or the lifetime driver’s license
suspension. Therefore, Taylor’s judgment of conviction, sentence, and lifetime driver’s license
suspension are affirmed.

2