Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence March 27, 2013 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-35-CR-0002590-2006
BEFORE: MUNDY, J., WECHT, J., and FITZGERALD, J. [*]
Appellant, Joseph John Reid, Jr., appeals from the March 27, 2013 judgment of sentence of 18 months to four years' imprisonment imposed following the revocation of his probation. After careful review, we affirm.
The trial court has summarized the relevant factual and procedural history as follows.
On February 2, 2007,  Appellant plead guilty to [a]ggravated [i]ndecent [a]ssault upon a [v]ictim [l]ess than 13 [y]ears of [a]ge. On May 8, 2007, he was sentenced to three (3) to six (6) years of incarceration followed by two years of probation along with the condition that he is prohibited from having contact with any minors and [his] co-defendant. He was also deemed a lifetime Megan's Law registrant for the crime [he] committed.
[Appellant was subsequently brought before the trial court on allegations that he violated conditions of his probation. On January 10, 2013, Appellant waived his Gagnon I hearing.] On March 20, 2013, [during his Gagnon II hearing, ] Appellant stipulated to violating two conditions[ of his probation:] condition 5c requiring refraining from assaulting behavior and condition 8 requiring no contact with minor children. Having stipulated to the violations, [Appellant] was sentenced on March 27, 2013, to a term of eighteen (18) months to four (4) years of incarceration and was given credit for time served from January 3, 2013.
 Appellant filed an [a]mended [m]otion for [r]econsideration of [s]entence on April 4, 2013, which was denied on April 8, 2013.
Trial Court Opinion, 12/26/13, at 1. This timely notice of appeal followed on April 24, 2013.
Appellant raises the following issue on appeal.
1. Did the [t]rial [c]ourt abuse its discretion by imposing a manifestly excessive sentence of total confinement without considering all relevant factors of the Sentencing Code, [42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9701-9799.41, ] specifically [S]ections 9721 and 9771?
Appellant's Brief at 3.
Our review is guided by the ...