State of Idaho v. Ash Justin Solorio

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 52366

STATE OF IDAHO, )
) Filed: December 29, 2025
Plaintiff-Respondent, )
) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk
v. )
) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED
ASH JUSTIN SOLORIO, ) 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.

Order relinquishing jurisdiction, affirmed.

Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kimberly A. Coster, 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
Ash Justin Solorio pled guilty to battery on a police officer, Idaho Code §§ 18-915(3), -903.
In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. The district court sentenced
Solorio to a unified term of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of two years.1 The
district court retained jurisdiction, and Solorio was sent to participate in the rider program. After
Solorio completed his rider, the district court relinquished jurisdiction. Solorio appeals, claiming
that the district court erred by refusing to grant probation.
The decision to place a defendant on probation or whether, instead, to relinquish
jurisdiction over the defendant is a matter within the sound discretion of the district court and will

1
This sentence was ordered to run consecutively to all underlying sentences.

1
not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of that discretion. State v. Hood, 102 Idaho 711, 712,
639 P.2d 9, 10 (1981); 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 probation was not appropriate. We hold that Solorio has failed to show that
the district court abused its discretion in relinquishing jurisdiction.
The order of the district court relinquishing jurisdiction and imposing Solorio’s underlying
sentence is affirmed.

2