State of Idaho v. Arren Hunter Trujillo

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 51822

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: February 28, 2025
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
ARREN HUNTER TRUJILLO, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT
) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Defendant-Appellant. )
)

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon
County. Hon. Thomas W. Whitney, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and concurrent, unified terms of fifteen years, with
minimum periods of confinement of seven years, for aggravated assault (with an
enhancement for use of a deadly weapon) and unlawful discharge of a firearm,
affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Jenny C. Swinford, Deputy
Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kacey L. Jones, Deputy Attorney
General, Boise, for respondent.
________________________________________________

Before HUSKEY, Judge; LORELLO, Judge;
and TRIBE, Judge
________________________________________________
PER CURIAM
Arren Hunter Trujillo pled guilty to one count of aggravated assault, Idaho Code § 18-905
(with an enhancement for use of a deadly weapon, I.C. § 19-2520) and one count of unlawful
discharge of a firearm, I.C. § 18-3317. In exchange for his guilty pleas, additional charges were
dismissed. The district court sentenced Trujillo to unified terms of fifteen years, with minimum
periods of confinement of seven years, for each count. The sentence for aggravated assault was
ordered to run concurrently with the sentence for unlawful discharge of a firearm. Trujillo appeals,
arguing that his sentences are excessive.

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, Trujillo’s judgment of conviction and sentences
are affirmed.

2