State of Idaho v. Crystal Lynn Schrecengost

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 49757

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: April 4, 2023
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
CRYSTAL LYNN SCHRECENGOST, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT
) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY
Defendant-Appellant. )
)

Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, State of Idaho, Latah
County. Hon. John C. Judge, District Judge.

Order revoking probation, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Brian R. Dickson, 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
Crystal Lynn Schrecengost pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine, Idaho
Code § 37-2732(c)(1). In exchange for her guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The
district court imposed a unified sentence of five years with two years determinate, but after a period
of retained jurisdiction, suspended the sentence and placed Schrecengost on probation.
Subsequently, Schrecengost admitted to violating the terms of the probation, and the district court
consequently revoked probation and ordered execution of the original sentence. Schrecengost
appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in revoking probation and ordering
execution of her underlying sentence.

1
It is within the trial court’s discretion to revoke probation if any of the terms and conditions
of the probation have been violated. I.C. §§ 19-2603, 20-222; State v. Beckett, 122 Idaho 324,
325, 834 P.2d 326, 327 (Ct. App. 1992); State v. Adams, 115 Idaho 1053, 1054, 772 P.2d 260, 261
(Ct. App. 1989); State v. Hass, 114 Idaho 554, 558, 758 P.2d 713, 717 (Ct. App. 1988). In
determining whether to revoke probation a court must examine whether the probation is achieving
the goal of rehabilitation and consistent with the protection of society. State v. Upton, 127 Idaho
274, 275, 899 P.2d 984, 985 (Ct. App. 1995); Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; Hass,
114 Idaho at 558, 758 P.2d at 717. The court may, after a probation violation has been established,
order that the suspended sentence be executed or, in the alternative, the court is authorized under
I.C.R. 35 to reduce the sentence. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at 327; State v. Marks, 116
Idaho 976, 977, 783 P.2d 315, 316 (Ct. App. 1989). The court may also order a period of retained
jurisdiction. I.C. § 19-2601(4). A decision to revoke probation will be disturbed on appeal only
upon a showing that the trial court abused its discretion. Beckett, 122 Idaho at 325, 834 P.2d at
327. In reviewing the propriety of a probation revocation, the focus of the inquiry is the conduct
underlying the trial court’s decision to revoke probation. State v. Morgan, 153 Idaho 618, 621,
288 P.3d 835, 838 (Ct. App. 2012). Thus, this Court will consider the elements of the record
before the trial court that are properly made part of the record on appeal. Id.
Applying the foregoing standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot
say that the district court abused its discretion either in revoking probation or in ordering execution
of Schrecengost’s sentence. Therefore, the order revoking probation and directing execution of
Schrecengost’s previously suspended sentence is affirmed.

2