*1 Before GUITERREZ, Chief Judge; HUSKEY, Judge;

and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Michael T. Bristlin pleaded guilty to one count of lewd conduct with a minor, Idaho Code § 18-1508, in each of his two cases. The district court imposed a unified sentence of fifteen years, with three years fixed, in each case, with the sentences running concurrently. Bristlin appeals, contending that the district court erred when it refused to retain jurisdiction in his case.

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-

1

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). Whether to retain jurisdiction is a matter within the sound discretion of the district court. State v. Lee , 117 Idaho 203, 205-06, 786 P.2d 596-97 (Ct. App.1990). Probation is the ultimate goal of retained jurisdiction. State v. Jones , 141 Idaho 673, 677, 115 P.3d 764, 768 (Ct. App. 2005). There can be no abuse of discretion if the district court has sufficient evidence before it to conclude that the defendant is not a suitable candidate for probation. Id . Applying the relevant standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Bristlin’s judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.

2