Redding v. State, No. 61122

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtMcCORMICK
Citation274 N.W.2d 315
PartiesCurtis Lee REDDING, Appellee, v. STATE of Iowa, Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 61122
Decision Date24 January 1979

Page 315

274 N.W.2d 315
Curtis Lee REDDING, Appellee,
v.
STATE of Iowa, Appellant.
No. 61122.
Supreme Court of Iowa.
Jan. 24, 1979.

Page 316

Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., Raymond W. Sullins, Asst. Atty. Gen., and David H. Correll, County Atty., for appellant.

James C. Dunbar of Dunbar & Dunbar, Waterloo, for appellee.

Considered by REES, P. J., and McCORMICK, ALLBEE, McGIVERIN and LARSON, JJ.

McCORMICK, Justice.

In 1973 Redding was convicted and sentenced upon a plea of guilty to robbery. He did not appeal. Four years later he brought the present postconviction action alleging his plea was involuntary and was taken without compliance with State v. Sisco, 169 N.W.2d 542 (Iowa 1969). In this action, the trial court set aside the conviction and ordered that Redding be permitted to plead anew because of the plea-taking judge's noncompliance with Sisco. The State contended below and contends here that the postconviction action is barred because Redding did not follow procedures for preserving error required by State v. Reaves, 254 N.W.2d 488 (Iowa 1977), and he did not establish an excuse for failing to raise his postconviction claims on direct appeal. We affirm the trial court.

The postconviction action is not barred because of Redding's failure to preserve error in accordance with Reaves because the Reaves procedures were made applicable prospectively only.

Nor is the action barred because of failure to appeal. The involuntariness claim could not have been decided on direct review because it depended on evidence which would not appear in the record of the plea proceeding. Failure to raise an issue on appeal is excused when the issue could not have been decided there. Fontaine v. United States, 411 U.S. 213, 93 S.Ct. 1461, 36 L.Ed.2d 169 (1973); State v. Boge, 252 N.W.2d 411 (Iowa 1977). A postconviction action is an appropriate way to make a claim which depends on evidence De hors the original record. See, e. g., State v. Kellogg, 263 N.W.2d 539, 544 (Iowa 1978).

Even though the Sisco claim could have been asserted on direct review, it could not be presented unless an appeal was taken, and none was taken here. A distinction exists between the right to maintain a postconviction action when an appeal or prior postconviction action was pursued and the right to do so when no prior proceeding was held.

Page 317

Postconviction actions are not ordinarily available to correct errors which should have been raised in an earlier proceeding, when...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Fryer v. State, No. 66755
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • October 27, 1982
    ...See id. at 414-15 (sufficient reasons for previous failure to assert grounds for relief apparent from record); cf., Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315 (Iowa 1979) (deliberate and inexcusable failure to pursue claims for relief and appeal bars postconviction action). We have declined to constr......
  • Hinkle v. State, No. 63313
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 19, 1980
    ...raised the inadequacy issue on his direct appeal. See, e. g., Armento v. Baughman, 290 N.W.2d 11, 13 (Iowa 1980); Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315, 317 (Iowa 1979); Bledsoe v. State, 257 N.W.2d 32, 33, 34 (Iowa 1977); §§ 663A.2, -.8, The Code. Multiple grievances of a convicted defendant sh......
  • Polly v. State, No. 83-1095
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 19, 1984
    ...show Polly "deliberately and inexcusably failed to pursue his grounds now asserted for relief" on direct appeal, citing Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315, 317 (Iowa The second hearing on Polly's application for post-conviction relief occurred May 13, 1983, Judge James P. Kelley presiding. Re......
  • Stanford v. Iowa State Reformatory, No. 60201
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 30, 1979
    ...proceeding. Both cases involved rule 16 dismissals. Our resolution of this issue is aided by pertinent language in Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315, 317 (Iowa 1979), where, in discussing the Bledsoe standard, we However, this burden does not exist when the conviction has not previously been......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Fryer v. State, No. 66755
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • October 27, 1982
    ...See id. at 414-15 (sufficient reasons for previous failure to assert grounds for relief apparent from record); cf., Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315 (Iowa 1979) (deliberate and inexcusable failure to pursue claims for relief and appeal bars postconviction action). We have declined to constr......
  • Hinkle v. State, No. 63313
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 19, 1980
    ...raised the inadequacy issue on his direct appeal. See, e. g., Armento v. Baughman, 290 N.W.2d 11, 13 (Iowa 1980); Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315, 317 (Iowa 1979); Bledsoe v. State, 257 N.W.2d 32, 33, 34 (Iowa 1977); §§ 663A.2, -.8, The Code. Multiple grievances of a convicted defendant sh......
  • Polly v. State, No. 83-1095
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 19, 1984
    ...show Polly "deliberately and inexcusably failed to pursue his grounds now asserted for relief" on direct appeal, citing Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315, 317 (Iowa The second hearing on Polly's application for post-conviction relief occurred May 13, 1983, Judge James P. Kelley presiding. Re......
  • Stanford v. Iowa State Reformatory, No. 60201
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 30, 1979
    ...proceeding. Both cases involved rule 16 dismissals. Our resolution of this issue is aided by pertinent language in Redding v. State, 274 N.W.2d 315, 317 (Iowa 1979), where, in discussing the Bledsoe standard, we However, this burden does not exist when the conviction has not previously been......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT