State of Idaho v. Ahmed Majed Abdulhamza

── State of Idaho v. Ahmed Majed Abdulhamza ── Court: Idaho Court of Appeals Date: May 15, 2026 Category: General IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 52004 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: May 15, 2026 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk v. ) ) THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED AHMED MAJED ABDULHAMZA, ) OPINION AND SHALL NOT ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY Defendant-Appellant.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. Patrick J. Miller, District Judge. Judgment of conviction and aggregate unified sentence of twenty years, with a minimum period of incarceration of seven years, for aggravated assault enhanced by the use of a deadly weapon, unlawful possession of a firearm, intimidating a witness, and two counts of violation of a no-contact order, affirmed. Erik R. Lehtinen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kierra W. Mai, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Kierra W. Mai argued. Hon. Raúl R. Labrador, Attorney General; Kale D. Gans, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Kale D. Gans argued. ________________________________________________ HUSKEY, Judge Ahmed Majed Abdulhamza appeals from his judgment of conviction for aggravated assault enhanced by the use of a deadly weapon, unlawful possession of a firearm, witness intimidation, and two counts of violation of a no-contact order. Abdulhamza argues the district court abused its discretion when it increased the severity of his sentence based solely on dismissed charges and when it imposed an excessive sentence. The State argues the district court did not sentence Abdulhamza based solely on the dismissed charges and did not impose an excessive sentence. We hold the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering the dismissed charges as it did not sentence Abdulhamza based solely on the dismissed charges. The district court also did not impose an excessive sentence. Abdulhamza’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed. 1  I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Abdulhamza was on parole when the facts of this case occurred. Abdulhamza and the victim, B.M., were in a romantic relationship but had ended their relationship the previous day. Abdulhamza, while outside of B.M.’s home, repeatedly texted B.M. requesting that she open the door and then threatened to “bust down [the] door.” Abdulhamza eventually broke into B.M.’s home and forced his way through her locked bedroom door. B.M. was inside the bedroom along with her male friend, J.I., the other victim in this case. Abdulhamza hit J.I. on the side of his head with a firearm; made J.I. empty his pockets; took a knife from J.I.; and then instructed J.I. to leave B.M.’s home, which he did. Abdulhamza then hit B.M. in the face, pulled her by her hair down the staircase, and told her that he was going to kill her. Abdulhamza took B.M.’s cell phone from her and forced her into his vehicle. Once inside the vehicle, Abdulhamza continued to hit and threaten B.M. by waiving the knife toward her and pointing the firearm at her. Abdulhamza drove B.M. to his mother’s house where he continued hitting B.M.; when she tried to leave, Abdulhamza blocked the door and pushed B.M. into a closet. Abdulhamza got on top of B.M. and began to choke her. B.M. described feeling light-headed and her hands going numb. Abdulhamza then forced B.M. to per