In Byrd v. United States, decided on May 14, 2018, the U.S. Supreme court ruled that the mere fact that a driver in lawful possession or control of a rental car is not listed on the rental agreement will not defeat his or her otherwise reasonable expectation of privacy. The Defendant was not listed as an authorized driver on the rental agreement, and the agreement said permitting an unauthorized driver to drive the car would violate the agreement, but that did not defeat his reasonable expectation of privacy not to have the vehicle searched while he was in possession of it, because the authorized driver had given him the keys to the car. Hence, he still was protected by the 4th amendment. Therefore, the search of the vehicle merely because he was not an authorized driver violated his rights, and the evidence seized had to be suppressed as fruits of an unlawful search.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that a Defendant is entitled to request in discovery the documents of an investigation of an allegedly false claim of abuse by the victim, even if the claim was made after the Defendant was convicted.
Iowa Court of Appeals holds that there was insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction of felon in possession of firearm when the guns were in a home the Defendant jointly possessed with someone else, and there was no evidence the Defendant had actual possession of or the right or authority to maintain control of the firearms as opposed to the mere ability to do so, and the firearms were owned by the other tenant.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that when a Defendant on probation is ordered to spend time in an alternative jail facility or a community correctional residential treatment program or halfway house, and then probation is revoked, the Defendant must be given credit for time served in that facility.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that practicing massage therapy without a license is not a crime, and therefore such acts cannot support the State’s civil forfeiture action. Furthermore, there was insufficient evidence to prove that the establishment was engaging in prostitution.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that the Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) was not granted the authority by the legislature to issue rules regulating Automated Traffic Enforcement systems (ATE). Hence, any rules passed by the IDOT regarding ATEs are invalid. Various cities were successful in their challenges to the IDOT’s authority to set requirements, regulations, and limits regarding their ATEs. Hence, cities can pass and enforce ATE laws without having to answer to the IDOT.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that whenever there are reasonable doubts about a Defendant’s mental competency, even if such doubts arise during trial, a hearing must be held to determine competency.
Client’s charges of possession of controlled substances and possession of drug paraphernalia have been dismissed. After filing a motion to suppress, arguing that my client’s detention was unconstitutional, because he was forced to wait while a drug detection dog was brought to the scene and walked around the car, without reasonable suspicion of the presence of drugs, the State conceded the point and agreed to dismiss the charges.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that proof of the mailing of the notice informing a driver that he or she is barred from driving is not an essential element of the aggravated misdemeanor crime of driving while barred.
Iowa Supreme Court holds that a claim of actual innocence may be made on appeal (post-conviction relief) even though the Defendant pled guilty.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that a conviction of robbery under an aiding and abetting theory requires proof of knowledge of or intent regarding the dangerous weapon or gun.
After hearing, the Iowa Department of Transportation has rescinded my client’s drivers license revocation, ruling that the prescription drug defense applied.