State of Idaho v. Jacob Michael Jaeger

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 50341

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: May 16, 2024
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
JACOB MICHAEL JAEGER, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT
) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Defendant-Appellant. )
)

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

Judgment of conviction and aggregate sentence of five years, with a minimum
period of confinement of two years determinate, for felony domestic violence and
intimidating, impeding, or influencing a witness, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy
Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

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

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge;
and LORELLO, Judge
________________________________________________

PER CURIAM
Jacob Michael Jaeger was found guilty of felony domestic violence, Idaho Code § 18-
918(2)(a); intimidating, impeding, or influencing a witness, I.C. § 18-2604; and misdemeanor
resisting and/or obstructing an officer, I.C. § 18-705. The district court imposed an aggregate
sentence of five years with two years determinate, suspended the sentence, and placed Jaeger on
probation for a period of five years for felony domestic violence and intimidating, impeding, or
influencing a witness. The district court sentenced Jaeger on the misdemeanor charge of resisting

1
and/or obstructing to serve ninety days in jail. Jaeger 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-
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
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, Jaeger’s judgment of conviction and sentence
are affirmed.

2