July-August, 2004

State v. Matheson, ___ N.W.2d __ (Iowa 7/21/2004)  [1]  Sentencing – burden of proof when defendant challenges admission of evidence.  Where challenged evidence at sentencing is later determined improper, and the sentencing court implicitly overrules the challenge by admitting the material, "error is not cured when the sentencing court merely omits the tainted evidence in its list of sentencing considerations.  As a minimum the court should make it clear the offending evidence was not a consideration" in its sentence.  [2] Sentencing – victim impact statements regarding crimes committed in another state.  Admission of impact statements from victims of Illinois crime was error. "Authority to submit impact statements is authorized under Iowa Code section 915.21 and is wholly statutory.  A victim under our statute includes only those who are affected by a crime 'committed in this state.'  Iowa Code § 915.10(3)."

State v. Powell, __ N.W.2d ___ (Iowa 7/21/2004).  Right to effective counsel -- attorney alleged to represent potential witness.  Trial court abused its discretion in denying defendant's request for substitute counsel on the basis of a possible conflict without conducting a further inquiry.  Defendant alleged a conflict prior to arraignment; trial court held a hearing on the request for new counsel at arraignment but found that there were only allegations of a possible conflict involving witnesses who might be called at trial, then denied the request for substitute counsel "at this time" but did not revisit the issue.  Remanding for determination of the existence of an actual conflict, the Court found partial corroboration of the claim defendant's claims in the Minutes of Testimony, which revealed that the a very large amount of pseudoephedrine -- which defendant was convicted of stealing -- was found in a meth lab owned by another person, whom defendant alleged his own attorney also represented.  The Supreme Court indicated that record did not reveal whether defense counsel also represented that man, although defense counsel told the trial court at the hearing that she did not have a conflict:  "Simply put, the court did not sufficiently examine the relationship between [defendant], [defense counsel] and [the meth lab person].  The court therefore abused its discretion when it denied Powell's request for substitution, insofar as it did so without developing the facts upon which such discretion could properly be exercised."  Although the relationship between defense counsel's representations of Powell and the second person was unclear, the Court notes that "we have long discouraged multiple representation of criminal defendants under circumstances similar to those alleged here.")

State v. Wilkins, ___ N.W.2d ___ (Iowa 2004) (8/11/2004).  Right to counsel – effect of uncounseled prior convictions.  The Sixth Amendment permits the use of prior uncounseled convictions to enhance pending charges if the uncounseled convictions did not result in any incarceration.  The defendant’s first offense, although uncounseled, was a deferred judgment which did not result in incarceration.  “Because Wilkins was not imprisoned with respect to her prior misdemeanor conviction, her motion based on a denial of counsel should have been rejected.”  (disavowing State v. Cooper, 343 N.W.2d 485 (Iowa 1984)).