State v. Juan Cervantes-Vasquez

Defendant Juan Cervantes-Vasquez pled guilty to grand theft and received a unified seven-year sentence with a three-year minimum; the sentence was suspended and he was placed on probation.
Cervantes-Vasquez admitted violating probation; the district court revoked probation, retained jurisdiction, and sent him to the rider program.
After successful completion of the rider, the district court again suspended the sentence and reimposed probation.
Cervantes-Vasquez later admitted a new probation violation; the district court revoked probation and ordered execution of the original suspended sentence.
Cervantes-Vasquez appealed, arguing the district court abused its discretion in revoking probation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused its discretion in revoking probation	Cervantes-Vasquez argued the court improperly revoked probation	The State argued the court properly revoked probation after violations and could execute the suspended sentence	Court affirmed: no abuse of discretion in revoking probation
Whether execution of the original suspended sentence was improper	Cervantes-Vasquez argued execution was unwarranted given rehabilitation efforts	The State argued execution was authorized after established violations	Court affirmed execution of the suspended sentence

State v. Beckett, 122 Idaho 324 (Ct. App.) (probation revocation standard and court discretion)
State v. Adams, 115 Idaho 1053 (Ct. App.) (probation revocation authority)
State v. Hass, 114 Idaho 554 (Ct. App.) (probation revocation factors)
State v. Upton, 127 Idaho 274 (Ct. App.) (revocation: rehabilitation and public protection inquiry)
State v. Marks, 116 Idaho 976 (Ct. App.) (court may reduce sentence under Crim. R. 35 after violation)
State v. Urrabazo, 150 Idaho 158 (Idaho) (retained jurisdiction as an option)
State v. Morgan, 153 Idaho 618 (Ct. App.) (focus on conduct underlying revocation)