The Iowa Court of Appeals has ruled that the pat down search of a suspect was unconstitutional, for it went beyond the consent for a search for weapons, and the officer squeezed and manipulated the pockets before pulling out a pill container which could not be immediately identified as illegal contraband prior to pulling it out of the pocket.
Client charged with Operating While Intoxicated has charge dismissed.
Client charged with operating while intoxicated (OWI), possession of drugs, and possession of drug paraphernalia obtains a deferred judgment on the possession charge, and dismissal of the OWI and paraphernalia charges.
Client charged with domestic abuse assault causing injury has charge plead down to simple misdemeanor disorderly conduct for a deferred judgment and probation.
Iowa Supreme Court discusses how criminal restitution should be properly calculated and proven. In this case, the Court reversed the lower courts, holding that the restitution was unproven, excessive, and not legally cognizable.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that a defendant cannot be sentenced as a habitual offender for felony OWI 3rd offense because the maximum sentence for this offense is set specifically by statute; hence the specific maximum takes precedence over the general habitual offender rule.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that jury instructions must contain marshalling instructions explaining whether specific intent or general intent applies, and to which crimes.
Iowa Supreme Court rules that a motion to suppress should have been granted in the case in which the police justified the stop of a vehicle based on the community caretaking function, wherein the police claimed they were doing a safety check on a person who was a passenger whom they believed might be there and who previously might had been in a motor vehicle accident in another vehicle. The requirements of the community caretaking function were not met.
Iowa Court of Appeals reverses conviction of Defendant accused of Operating While Intoxicated and Driving While Barred, for the State failed to prove with substantial evidence that he was the operator of the vehicle.
Trial exhibits must satisfy the requirements of authentication and the exceptions to the hearsay rule.
Suppression of evidence is required when a pat-down search exceeds the scope of the consent given. Consent to a pat down does not give the officer authority to reach into pockets, to remove items, and then to open items, unless the criminality of the items are immediately apparent from the mere patting down of the outside of the clothing.