Client’s theft charge dismissed after successful completion of community service as part of a deferred prosecution agreement.
Defendant’s 6th Amendment Rights
Iowa Supreme Court rules that once a Defendant’s 6th amendment rights have attached following formal charges, and he obtains a lawyer, it is improper for a jailhouse informant to deliberately elicit information from the Defendant if that informant is providing the information to the State in return for some kind of consideration.
Iowa Supreme Court – Article II Section 5
Iowa Supreme Court holds that Article II section 5 of the Iowa Constitution permits persons convicted of any felony to be disqualified from voting in Iowa until pardoned or otherwise restored to the rights of citizenship.
Domestic Assault for Reckless Conduct
U.S. Supreme Court holds that a conviction for a misdemeanor domestic assault for reckless conduct (as opposed to knowing or intentional acts) qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence to trigger a federal gun possession ban.
Iowa Supreme Court plurality holds that under the state constitution, the right to counsel does not attach in the context of a request for a private phone call to an attorney after implied consent has been invoked requesting a breath specimen/chemical test, and Iowa Code section 804.20, which allows a phone call to an attorney to be monitored, but an in-person private meeting with an attorney, does not violate the right to counsel under the Iowa Constitution Article I, section 10. Actually, three justices so held, three dissented and disagreed with the decision, and one justice concurring with the result believed that even if the right to counsel attached, it was not violated by the monitored phone call.
A Defendant’s speedy trial right is violated even when the Defendant accepts a proffer plea agreement after the deadline has passed, even when the assertion of the right and the motion to dismiss is made on the cusp of trial, for mere acquiescence is not a waiver, and even when the reason for the delay was in part resulting from the fact that the Defendant was incarcerated by the State on other charges in another county and therefore did not appear at the arraignment. Hence, dismissal was required.
Suppression of evidence is required when a vehicle is stopped for speeding and other infractions, but the officer extends the stop longer than necessary to deal with the offenses for which the stop was made. Mere nervousness and shaking of the Defendant’s hand, and refusal to consent to a search, were insufficient grounds to make the Defendant wait for a drug dog sniff. Hence, because the scope of the seizure was impermissible, the evidence had to be suppressed and the resulting OWI charge dismissed.
Iowa Court of Appeals holds that a reversal and remand for a new trial is required when the minutes of testimony failed to inform the Defendant of the specific topics of the witness’s testimony.
Iowa Supreme Court holds that when a general verdict contains several theories of guilt, and one or more contain insufficient proof, reversal and a new trial is required even if there was sufficient proof of guilt on one or more theories, because the court cannot speculate regarding which theory upon which the jury relied to convict.
Insufficient evidence of assault means that the Court cannot issue a domestic no contact protective order.
When the Defendant conditions his plea upon concurrence of the court with the plea agreement, and one or more of the plea conditions cannot be fulfilled and the judge therefore varies from the plea agreement in sentencing, the Defendant must be allowed to withdraw the guilty plea.
After a suspect who is taken into custody invokes his right to an in-person private meeting and consultation with an attorney, it is a violation of Iowa Code section 804.20 for the officer to instead demand that the suspect make an immediate decision about whether or not to submit to a breath test. Instead, the officer should have ascertained who was coming and when they would arrive in order to assure the testing occurred within the 2-hour window. As a result of the rights violation, the breath test result as well as the independent test result were suppressed.