State of Idaho v. Jared Thomas Leighliter

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 51419

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: March 17, 2025
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
JARED THOMAS LEIGHLITER, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT
) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Defendant-Appellant. )
)

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonner
County. Hon. Susie Jensen, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period
of incarceration of two years, for felony fleeing or attempting to elude a police
officer, affirmed.

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

Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Elizabeth H. Estess, Deputy Attorney
General, Boise, for respondent.
________________________________________________

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

PER CURIAM
Jared Thomas Leighliter was found guilty of felony fleeing or attempting to elude a police
officer, Idaho Code § 49-1404(2), and misdemeanor resisting or obstructing police officers,
I.C. § 18-705. For the felony fleeing or attempting to elude conviction, the district court imposed
a unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of incarceration of two years, and for the
misdemeanor resisting or obstructing conviction, the district court ordered credit for time served.
Leighliter appeals, contending that his sentence is excessive, and the district court abused its
discretion by not retaining jurisdiction.

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). That discretion includes
the trial court’s decision regarding whether to retain jurisdiction. I.C. § 19-2601(3), (4); State v.
Reber, 138 Idaho 275, 278, 61 P.3d 632, 635 (Ct. App. 2002); State v. Lee, 117 Idaho 203, 205-
06, 786 P.2d 594, 596-97 (Ct. App. 1990). The record in this case shows that the district court
properly considered the information before it and determined that retaining jurisdiction was not
appropriate.
Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that
the district court abused its discretion. Therefore, Leighliter’s judgment of conviction and sentence
are affirmed.

2