'There was no mistake; there was a choice': Ammon man sentenced to 22 years in lewd conduct case - East Idaho News
Crime Watch

‘There was no mistake; there was a choice’: Ammon man sentenced to 22 years in lewd conduct case

  Published at  | Updated at
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready ...
Brandon Robert Phillips sentencing | Daniel V. Ramirez, EastIdahoNews.com

IDAHO FALLS — A 42-year-old Ammon man was sentenced to seven years in prison on Wednesday morning after pleading guilty to sexually abusing a teen girl.

Brandon Robert Phillips was previously charged in March 2024 with three felony counts of lewd conduct with a minor, but had accepted a plea agreement on June 5.

Under the plea agreement, Phillips pleaded guilty to one count, and each side was free to argue at sentencing.

District Judge Brendon Taylor sentenced Phillips to seven years fixed and 15 years indeterminate. Phillips will have to register as a sex offender.

RELATED | Ammon man arrested for allegedly sexually abusing child over three years

Two victim impact statements were made during the sentencing by the victim and the victim’s father, which discussed the abuse the victim went through, and the toll it had on her and her family.

The victim discussed what she had reported in August 2024 when a Bonneville County Sheriff’s deputy first met with her over her report that Phillips had sexually abused her multiple times.

According to court documents, she had told a family member about the abuse in 2022, but was told to lie and to say it had never occurred. The victim had told deputies Phillips had told her to never speak with police and that he’d never admit to the allegations.

Bonneville County Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Lou Harris told the court in reviewing Phillips’s pre-sentence investigation, the report did recommend a period of incarceration, but that Phillips was placed low on his chances of recidivism, being scored at 10.

“At, 41, (he) is young enough to benefit from the opportunity to return to society after that period of incarceration, especially if he receives programming while in custody,” Harris said.

However, Harris took issue with the comments made by Phillip’s social worker that he still maintains his innocence in this case.

“I find it difficult, relative to the things he has admitted, that he would consider himself innocent,” Harris said.

Harris said Phillips considered himself innocent and perceived his actions as just a mistake or didn’t think what he did would result in these consequences.

However, Harris said this was not a mistake, as these actions had occurred for multiple years.

“There was no mistake; there was a choice,” Harris said.

Harris recommended a sentence of seven years fixed with 18 years indeterminate.

Phillips’ attorney, Curtis Smith, spoke on Harris’ point of the mistakes that Phillips recognizes his actions. However, Smith said his client had been proactive in getting counseling to take responsibility and understand how his actions affected the victim.

“That’s why it’s so critical that people in my client’s situation get the treatment. … Many people would just say, ‘Guess what? Just lock them away.’ That’s not feasible,” Smith said.

Smith said the issue for his client, was that he couldn’t get the help of counseling until after he had committed the crimes, and for many in the community, this is the case due to the limited resources available.

He said the community at large isn’t interested in this issue or in fixing it, but rather in executing punishment. Smith said those like Phillips, who have a low recidivism score and go to counseling, are at a lower risk of reoffending.

“They’re treatable. … There have been plenty of steps taken to try to remedy and show that he’s moving in the right direction,” Smith said.

Smith said Phillips was willing to change.

Smith recommended his client serve a retained jurisdiction, as it would allow his client to receive treatment, and it would give Taylor control over whether he served probation or prison.

If Taylor were considering a prison sentence, Smith’s recommendation was for Phillips to serve five years fixed.

Regarding Harris’ recommendation, Smith said a seven-year sentence often does not mean his client would get out, as from his experience serving on parole boards.

“A seven-year fixed is more likely a 10-year fixed because the parole board is going to keep someone for a few years beyond that fixed portion of time,” Smith said.

Smith also noted that Idaho statutes direct the courts to consider probation first, ahead of other possible punishments.

“I will be forever grateful that the nuances and the critical thinking that come into play in making these decisions only happen in one place on earth … and it’s in this courtroom,” Smith said.

Phillips was allowed to give a statement, and he apologized to the victim, his family, the court and the community.

“I apologize to the victim. … I am so sorry that my actions have hurt you,” Phillips said. “I am so sorry that I failed you.”

Before handing down Phillips’ sentence, Taylor commented on the pre-sentence investigation report, in which there were two different version of the events.

He said the victim and family members who gave their statements are consistent, unlike Phillips’ version of it.

Taylor went back to the report, which stated Phillips had maintained his innocence and had told others he was innocent.

“Your counselor’s records that stated you’ve always maintained your innocence. Friends that wrote on your behalf that you’d always maintained your innocence,” Taylor said. “I noted the victim’s statement that you told her that you would tell everybody that you were innocent — ‘to your dying breath’ was the phrase that she had used.”

Commenting on Smith’s point that most people won’t admit the whole truth, Taylor said Phillips has been in counseling for a while, and it was reported that Phillips didn’t believe he needed counseling unless the court ordered it.

However, Taylor agreed with Smith, saying that the laws involving sentencing should first consider placement in the community. Taylor said due to the factors in this case, he was weighing a term of imprisonment for Phillips, “that there is an undue risk that during the period of a suspended sentence of probation, the defendant will commit another crime, harmful to another person.”

“Given the nature of this crime, I’m hopeful that wouldn’t happen, but I don’t have enough confidence that there couldn’t be another victim,” Taylor said.

SUBMIT A CORRECTION