Marital privilege does not allow communications by wife
against abusing husband who is not the victim's care provider
STATE v. ANDERSON. ___ N.W.2d ___ (Sup. Ct. No. 00-1081) (Iowa 11/15/2001). [1] Evidence -- marital privilege. The marital privilege exception regarding child abuse cases (Iowa Code section 232.74) is limited to cases of child abuse that result from acts or omissions of a care provider. It does not apply to injuries to children that result from acts or omissions by a non-care provider. (reversed on this ground as the court "cannot conclude beyond a reasonable doubt the guilty verdict was unattributable to the evidence admitted in violation of the marital privilege.") [2] Lesser included offenses -- sexual abuse third. Neither assault nor assault with intent to inflict sexual abuse are lesser included offenses of sex abuse 3rd under the statutory rape version, as the latter does not include an element of "by force" or "against the will".
District court has subject matter jurisdiction but no authority to hear juvenile case that is not transferred up (so error is waivable by failure to preserve)
STATE v. EMERY, ___ N.W.2d ___ (Sup. Ct. No. 99-1957) (Iowa 11/15/2001). [1] Subject matter jurisdiction of district court over non-waived juvenile proceedings. Iowa Code sections 232.8 and 232.45 address the authority of the district court to adjudicate charges of delinquent acts, not its subject matter jurisdiction over such cases. Consequently, any failure to comply with the transfer procedure merely affects the authority of the district court to hear the case, which can be waived, as happened here when the defendant failed to object to the district court's adjudication of his case. [2] Juveniles -- application of mandatory minimums. Nothing in Iowa Code section 232.8(1)(c) suggests that juveniles who commit one of the specified drug offenses and are prosecuted as adults are to be sentenced any differently than similarly situated adults. [3] Juveniles -- exemption from mandatory minimum. The section 232.45(14) exemption from the mandatory minimum sentence does not apply where a juvenile's drug offense was excluded from the juvenile court's jurisdiction and consequently was never filed in juvenile court; so that defendant was not waived to district court for prosecution within the meaning of section 232.45(14). [4] Equal protection -- juveniles transferred vs. those not transferred. The different treatment of juveniles transferred to district court and juveniles excluded from juvenile court jurisdiction does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
Attack on sentencing court's supposed reliance on unproven charges rejected
STATE v. JOSE, ___ N.W.2d ___ (Sup. Ct. No. 00-760) (Iowa 11/15/2001) [1] Sentencing -- reliance on unproven charges. Sentencing court's reference to "additional crimes" fell far short of showing inappropriate reliance on unproven charges, appearing instead to reference defendant's prior convictions. [2] Restitution -- challenge to supplemental orders entered more than 30 days after sentencing. Defendant who seeks to appeal supplemental restitution orders after the date for appealing the original sentence has passed, but whose restitution plan was not complete at the time of appeal, can file a petition to modify the supplemental restitution orders during the appeal, to be determined by the district court as a matter collateral to appeal. In that event, defendant is entitled to court-appointed counsel.
