State v. Kenneth Dwayne Riley
Background
- Kenneth Dwayne Riley pled guilty to grand theft; an additional charge was dismissed in exchange for the plea.
- The district court imposed a unified 14-year sentence with a 7-year minimum, suspended execution, and placed Riley on probation.
- Riley admitted violating probation; the district court revoked probation and ordered execution of the original sentence.
- Riley moved under I.C.R. 35 for a reduction of sentence; the district court denied the motion.
- Riley appealed, arguing (1) the court abused its discretion in revoking probation, (2) the sentence is excessive, and (3) the district court erred in denying his Rule 35 motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Riley) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation of probation was an abuse of discretion | Revocation was unwarranted given probationary goals and circumstances | Probation terms were violated and revocation was within court discretion | No abuse; revocation affirmed |
| Whether the executed sentence is excessive | Sentence (14 years, 7-year min) is disproportionate | Sentence is within trial court's discretion and supported by record | Sentence not excessive; affirmed |
| Whether the district court should have reduced sentence sua sponte upon revocation | Court should have reduced sentence instead of ordering execution | Court may execute suspended sentence after violation; reduction is discretionary | No error; denial of reduction affirmed |
| Whether denial of I.C.R. 35 motion was improper | Rule 35 reduction warranted by new/additional information or leniency factors | Rule 35 is discretionary; defendant failed to show undue excessiveness or new info | Denial of Rule 35 motion affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Beckett, 122 Idaho 324 (1992) (probation may be revoked for violation; court has discretion to execute sentence)
- State v. Adams, 115 Idaho 1053 (1989) (standards for probation revocation review)
- State v. Hass, 114 Idaho 554 (1988) (probation revocation principles and discretion)
- State v. Upton, 127 Idaho 274 (1995) (probation revocation considers rehabilitation and public protection)
- State v. Morgan, 153 Idaho 618 (2012) (review focuses on record and conduct underlying revocation)
- State v. Hanington, 148 Idaho 26 (2009) (review of executed sentence considers events before and after original sentencing)
- State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 722 (2007) (review considers defendant's entire sentence)
- State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318 (2006) (Rule 35 is plea for leniency within court's discretion)
- State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201 (2007) (Rule 35 requires showing sentence excessive in light of new/additional information)
- State v. Forde, 113 Idaho 21 (1987) (Rule 35 review uses same criteria as original sentence review)
- State v. Marks, 116 Idaho 976 (1989) (after violation, court may reduce sentence under Rule 35 or execute suspended sentence)