State of Idaho v. Michael Rene Deherrera

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 49793

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: March 7, 2023
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
MICHAEL RENE DEHERRERA, ) 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. Cynthia K.C. Meyer, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period
of confinement of four years, for felony injury to a child, 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 BRAILSFORD, Judge
________________________________________________

PER CURIAM
Michael Renee Deherrera entered Alford1 pleas to one count of felony injury to a child,
Idaho Code § 18-1501(1) and one count of misdemeanor sexual battery, I.C. § 18-924. In
exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court imposed a
unified sentence of ten years with four years determinate for the injury to a child charge, and
sentence of 309 days with 309 days credit for time served for the sexual battery charge.
Deherrera appeals, contending that his sentence for the injury to a child charge is excessive.

1
See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970).
1
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, Deherrera’s judgment of conviction and
sentence are affirmed.

2