State of Idaho v. Casaundra Lee Brakke

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 50128

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: July 17, 2023
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
CASAUNDRA LEE BRAKKE, ) 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. Jason D. Scott, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and aggregate unified sentences of four years with three
years determinate for tracking in heroin, felony possession of a controlled
substance, misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance and possession of
drug paraphernalia, affirmed.

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

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

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

PER CURIAM
Casaundra Lee Brakke was found guilty of trafficking in heroin, Idaho Code § 37-
2732B(A); possession of a controlled substance (felony), I.C. § 37-2732(c); possession of a
controlled substance (misdemeanor), I.C. § 37-2732(c); and possession of drug paraphernalia,
I.C. § 37-2734A. The district court consolidated the instant case with another Ada County case
for purposes of sentencing. The district court imposed a unified sentence of four years with three
years determinate for trafficking in heroin; one year determinate for felony possession of a
controlled substance; and time served for misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance and

1
possession of drug paraphernalia. The district court ordered that the sentences run concurrent to
each other and concurrent to the other Ada County case that it consolidated with the instant case
for purposes of sentencing. Mindful of the invited error doctrine on appeal, Brakke appeals,
contending that her aggregate sentence of four years with three years determinate is excessive.
The doctrine of invited error applies to estop a party from asserting an error when that
party’s conduct induces the commission of the error. State v. Atkinson, 124 Idaho 816, 819, 864
P.2d 654, 657 (Ct. App. 1993). The purpose of the doctrine is to prevent a party who caused or
played an important role in prompting the trial court to take action from later challenging that
decision on appeal. State v. Barr, 166 Idaho 783, 786, 463 P.3d 1286, 1289 (2020). In short,
invited errors are not reversible. State v. Gittins, 129 Idaho 54, 58, 921 P.2d 754, 758 (Ct. App.
1996). Brakke requested the sentence she received and cannot now complain of error.
Therefore, Brakke’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.

2