Iowa Court of Appeals rules that law enforcement did not have legal grounds to enter the garage of a suspect who had been observed driving recklessly, twice crashing into a ditch and then driving into a cornfield, for neither exigent circumstances nor community caretaking functions were grounds to engage in a warrantless entry into the Defendant’s garage, even though the officers knocked and heard the Defendant say, “I’m coming.” Hence, OWI charge had to be dismissed.

Read the case here

After successful motion to suppress, in which the Court agreed with the defense motion that the stop of my client was unconstitutional and without probable cause, the State moved to dismiss all charges against my client, including Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) and Possession of Firearm While Intoxicated. Furthermore, my client’s drivers license revocation was rescinded, and full driving privileges have been restored.

A fixed sentencing policy by a judge is improper, and requires remand for a re-sentencing before a different judge.

Read the case here

There can be no burglary or trespass when the common area or lobby of an occupied structure or building may potentially be open to the public, and the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant would have an objective belief that the structure was not open to the public.

Read the case here

Kidnapping requires more than a mere seizure, but proof of confinement that makes the additional or separate other crime worse. The confinement element of Kidnapping is not established simply by evidence that the defendant impeded the victim’s movement by pointing a handgun at the victim for a period of time before shooting and killing him.

Read the case here

Iowa Supreme Court holds that under the expungement statute, a Defendant must pay all legally required costs and fees, including court-appointed attorney fees, before the Defendant is eligible for expungment of dismissed charges.

Read the case here

Iowa Court of Appeals holds that there was insufficient evidence produced at trial proving a felony conviction, which was necessary for the charge of felon in possession of a firearm, and therefore dismissal was required.

Read the case here

After a hearing with the Iowa Department of Transportation contesting the revocation of my client’s driver’s license, the IDOT Administrative Law Judge agreed that my client’s right to an Independent Chemical Test under Iowa Code section 321J.11 was violated, and therefore the administrative driver’s license revocation had to be rescinded and my client’s driver’s license not be revoked. As a result, the County Attorney agreed to a plea agreement in which the serious misdemeanor Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) criminal charge was amended and plead down to a lesser offense of simple misdemeanor simulating public intoxication for a fine.

After filing a motion to suppress and supportive brief in an Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence of Drugs case, a plea agreement was arrived upon wherein the Defendant plead guilty to the lesser amended offense of simple misdemeanor public intoxication for a fine and completion of an OWI Weekend program, and the State consented to a motion in limine suppressing the test refusal, which mean that my client would get her drivers license returned to her. An attendant charge of possession of drug paraphernalia was dismissed.

Iowa Court of Appeals rules that it is impermissible and a violation of the hearsay rule to admit a sworn deposition for the purpose of impeaching the testimony contained therein by using an unsworn out of court recorded hearsay statement by a witness who does not testify at trial. “The right given to the State to impeach its own witnesses . . . is to be used as a shield and not as a sword. The State is not entitled . . . to place a witness on the stand who is expected to give unfavorable testimony and then, in the guise of impeachment, offer evidence which is otherwise inadmissible.”

https://www.iowacourts.gov/courtcases/4042/embed/CourtAppealsOpinion

Iowa Supreme Court rules that an initial positive laboratory test for drugs is not sufficient for a conviction of OWI for having any amount of a controlled substance in the person’s urine.

Read the case here