State of Idaho v. Michele Renee Green

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 50944

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: January 7, 2025
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
MICHELE RENEE GREEN, ) 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. Cynthia Yee-Wallace, District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of twenty years, with a minimum
period of confinement of four years, for aggravated battery upon certain law
enforcement personnel and concurrent, unified sentence of five years, with a
minimum period of confinement of three years, for eluding a peace officer,
affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, 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
Michele Renee Green was found guilty of aggravated battery on certain law enforcement
personnel, I.C. §§ 18-915(1) and 18-907, and eluding a peace officer, I.C. § 49-1404(2)(b). The
district court sentenced Green to unified term of twenty years, with a minimum period of
confinement of four years, for aggravated battery upon certain law enforcement personnel and a
concurrent, unified term of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, for

1
eluding a peace officer. The district court retained jurisdiction and sent Green to participate in the
rider program. Following completion of her rider, the district court suspended Green’s sentences
and placed her on probation. Green appeals, arguing that her suspended 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, Green’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.

1
Green was also found guilty of and sentenced for misdemeanor driving under the influence
and resisting and/or obstructing an officer. However, she does not challenge these judgments of
conviction or sentences on appeal.

2