Recent Cases/News

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that Colorado’s law banning conversion therapy, as applied to  talk therapy, regulates speech based on viewpoint, and the lower courts erred by failing to apply sufficiently rigorous First Amendment scrutiny.

The First Amendment stands as a bulwark against any effort to prescribe an orthodoxy of views, reflecting a belief that each American enjoys an inalienable right to speak his mind and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for finding truth. Laws like Colorado’s, which suppress speech based on viewpoint, represent an egregious assault on both commitments.

Read the case

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that sovereign immunity applies to the state and arms of the state but not to legally independent entities the state creates.

Read the case

The Iowa Court of Appeals has reversed my client’s conviction for felony possession of methamphetamine, holding that the district court erred by failing to grant my client’s motion to suppress the evidence, obtained as a result of a violation of his constitutional rights.:

“Richard Noll appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled substance, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized during a traffic stop. A deputy found the controlled substance—two baggies of methamphetamine—in Noll’s pocket during a full-body search. The district court found no grounds to suppress because the deputy conducted a search incident to arrest. Noll contends the warrantless search of his pockets “did not follow or accompany an arrest; instead, it produced the basis for the arrest.” OPINION HOLDS: Noll is correct—“a search is not to be made legal by what it turns up.” United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 595 (1948). Here, the State cannot show that the deputy had probable cause to arrest Noll before finding the methamphetamine. And even if the deputy had probable cause to arrest for another offense, his search of Noll was not incident to an arrest based on that probable cause. So the search-incident-to-arrest exception did not apply. Thus, we reverse the district court’s denial of Noll’s motion to suppress and remand for further proceedings.”

Read the case

After filing a motion to suppress, arguing that my client’s constitutional rights were violated when the police trespassed onto and into his property, the State dismissed all of the charges against my client, including OWI 2nd offense, leaving the scene of a property damage accident, and interference with official acts.

The U.S. Supreme Court has once again discussed the parameters of the emergency aid doctrine as an exception to the 4th amendment, confirming that that police must have objectively reasonable grounds for believing that someone inside needs emergency assistance before entering the home without a warrant.

Read the case

The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled that courts are without authority to impose court costs on defendants for dismissed charges or cases. However, if a Defendant appeals such an order, a prosecutor has the power to then reverse the entire plea deal, institute the case anew, and pursue any and all potential charges.

Read the case

In a case in which the identity of the perpetrator is an issue, the Iowa Supreme Court has ruled that a district court judge should allow expert witness testimony regarding the strengths and weaknesses of eyewitness identification testimony as well as the proper procedures for photographic lineups and identifications so as to avoid false or erroneous identifications, and to fail to do so can be grounds for reversal and remand for retrial, as it was in this case.

Read the case

The Iowa Supreme Court has held that an Iowa Code section 901C.3 expungement requires the court to expunge the entire case, regardless of conviction or dismissal of various counts. When a  conviction is eligible for expungement, and it is paired with a dismissed count, the entire case must be expunged. However, in dicta, the Court also said that when one count is not eligible for expungement, then the other counts may not be expunged, unless there is some other statutory authority for expungement.

Read the case

After the filing of a motion to suppress, arguing that my client’s rights were violated by the unconstitutional entry by police into his garage, a plea agreement was arrived upon, in which his aggravated misdemeanor OWI 2nd offense charge was pled down to a simple misdemeanor public intoxication charge for a minimum fine only.

After trial on a criminal mischief charge, the Judge found my client not guilty! The Court held that as a matter of law, the State had failed to prove jurisdiction, and had failed to prove any actual damages.

Client DB was convicted of possession of drug paraphernalia in absentia. The problem was that DB never knew about the charge, never was notified, never was arrested, nor served with the complaint. The officer only mailed the complaint, which was insufficient due process, and actually mailed it the wrong address, even presuming mailing could be sufficient notice, which  it was not. Such was a violation of due process.

Fast forward 8 years later, when DB came to learn about the conviction. DB hired Adam Pollack, who filed a motion to set aside the conviction, which was granted. The State then filed a motion to dismiss, which was granted. The Court then granted a motion to expunge. The case is now gone from my client’s record!

Client accused of trespass. After a bench trial, the judge found my client not guilty and dismissed the case. There were multiple defenses put forth, but the one the judge seized upon to find reasonable doubt was that there was insufficient evidence that the trespass warning was sufficiently noticed to my client. Therefore, my client did not knowingly trespass upon the property.