State v. Basquin
| Decision Date | 25 February 2022 |
| Docket Number | 20-1571 |
| Citation | 970 N.W.2d 643 |
| Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Timothy Michael BASQUIN, Appellant. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Martha J. Lucey, State Appellate Defender, and Rachel C. Regenold, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Darrel Mullins, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
This appeal presents a frontal attack on the validity of a key provision in our supervisory orders promulgated in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic. The defendant, represented by counsel, signed and entered his written plea of guilty to a class "C" felony. He brings this direct appeal challenging the validity of that plea.
He argues that the rules of criminal procedure, our precedent, and due process require an in-person plea colloquy in open court and that our supervisory orders temporarily allowing written pleas violate due process and separation of powers. We adopted these supervisory orders as a health and safety measure during the pandemic, and it is worth noting that attorneys in the Office of the State Appellate Defender, which represents the defendant, have often asked our court during the pandemic to be excused from appearing in person before our court for similar health and safety reasons. The State argues the appeal should be dismissed because the defendant cannot establish the requisite good cause to proceed under Iowa Code section 814.6(1)(a )(3). On the merits, the State argues that our court's constitutional and inherent authority allowed us to permit written guilty pleas to felonies during the pandemic, that our supervisory orders did not violate due process or the separation of powers, and that we should affirm his plea-based conviction. We retained the appeal to decide those questions.
On our review, we hold the defendant meets the good cause requirement by presenting questions of first impression as to the validity of our supervisory orders and his written guilty plea to a felony. We uphold our supervisory orders as lawful exercises of our constitutional and inherent authority during the pandemic. We reject his due process and separation of powers challenges to his written plea, and we affirm his conviction.
On June 6, 2019, Fayette Police Department Chief Benjamin Davis received a phone call at 10:45 p.m. from a former tenant of a rental townhouse who was awaiting the return of his security deposit and came back to see if the house cleaner was doing her job. He looked through a window and saw her with a man inside weighing a "mound of cocaine." Chief Davis called the owners who said they had a house cleaner but no one should be inside the townhouse at that hour.
Police arrived to find two individuals in the garage: Terri Woods and Timothy Basquin. Chief Davis ordered them to remain in the garage while he entered the townhouse to look for other persons. He found baggies containing a white powder, a pipe, and a scale on the kitchen counter. Woods and Basquin were arrested and transported to jail, where Basquin turned over another baggie with a white substance. Police confiscated approximately four grams of methamphetamine in total.
The owners identified Woods as the house cleaner, whom they had not given permission to live there. They knew Woods had a friend who helped her haul trash. The owners gave police permission to search the entire townhouse. The police found clothing, makeup, and bedding that indicated Woods was living there. Basquin's motorcycle was in the garage. No additional controlled substances were found.
On June 7, at Basquin's initial appearance, the court appointed counsel to represent him. His bond was later modified to permit pretrial release. On June 17, the attorney moved to withdraw due to a breakdown in the attorney–client relationship. The court allowed the withdrawal and appointed new counsel on June 17. The second lawyer moved to withdraw. The court granted the motion and appointed a third attorney to represent Basquin on July 9. The same day, the State filed, and the court approved, the trial information charging Basquin for the manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to manufacture or deliver a controlled substance—methamphetamine—in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(1)(c )(6) (2019), and burglary in the third degree, in violation of sections 713.6A(1) and 713.1. On July 19, Basquin filed a written arraignment and plea of not guilty and waived his right to speedy trial.
After cycling through five different attorneys and after numerous procedural delays, pursuant to the supervisory order concerning COVID-19, Basquin was permitted to file a written Alford guilty plea on November 12, 2020, in lieu of an in-person hearing. In the written plea, Basquin affirmed in writing that he was represented by counsel who was "willing to defend [him] at trial if [he] desire[s] a trial" and that he has been advised of his constitutional and statutory rights. He acknowledged with his initials that he had sufficient time to consult his attorney, he fully understood the proceedings against him, and he understood the charges within the trial information. He admitted in writing to "all of the elements of count[ ] I of the trial information" and "all of the elements of count II of the trial information."
Basquin stated in writing that he understood the plea agreement to be in exchange for his plea to the drug charge, the State would dismiss the burglary charge and recommend probation for two years and the suspension of fines, surcharges, and court costs. The prosecutor initialed the terms of the plea agreement. Basquin affirmed his understanding in writing of the maximum and minimum sentence for the drug charge and the enumerated rights he was forfeiting, including his right to a trial. Basquin marked that he understood "that the Court is not bound by the plea agreement and may sentence [him] up to the maximum sentence provided by law," but he also wrote "n/a" off to the side of that provision.
His written plea waived his right of allocution and his "right to a hearing in open court for [his] guilty plea and for sentencing." The written document requested that he be sentenced immediately. Basquin acknowledged in writing that he has "discussed all possible legal defenses with [his] attorney" and understood that by "pleading guilty to a felony [he] may lose [his] right to serve on a jury, vote, and own firearms" and "may also become ineligible to receive state and federal benefits." He affirmed in writing that he understood that he has "no absolute right to appeal a guilty plea" and that if he alleges "good cause and/or a defect in this plea proceeding," he has thirty days to appeal. Basquin acknowledged in writing:
I understand that if I wish to challenge this plea of guilty, I must do so by filing a Motion in Arrest of Judgment at least five (5) days prior to the Court imposing sentence, but no more than 45 days from today's date. I understand that by asking the Court to impose sentence immediately that I waive my right to challenge the plea of guilty which I have hereby entered.
Basquin appeared in person at the sentencing hearing on November 13. The district court found that "the plea was freely, voluntarily and intelligently made and that there was a factual basis for the plea." Basquin was found guilty of violating section 124.401(1)(c )(6) and was sentenced to a suspended ten-year prison sentence, suspended fines and surcharges, and informal probation for two years. The court found that Basquin was unable to reasonably pay category "B" restitution. The court considered the nature of the offense, the plea agreement, and his prior record. Basquin did not file a motion in arrest of judgment. On December 1, Basquin's counsel filed a notice of appeal.
On appeal, Basquin, through new counsel, argues the Iowa Supreme Court's COVID-19 supervisory orders authorizing written felony guilty pleas violated "precedent, due process, and separation of powers." The State argues Basquin lacks good cause to appeal under section 814.6(1)(a )(3) and our court has "the authority and duty to temporarily amend or suspend a rule of criminal procedure during a crisis" without violating due process or separation of powers. We retained the case.
"We review constitutional issues de novo." Klouda v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Dep't of Corr. Servs. , 642 N.W.2d 255, 260 (Iowa 2002). "We review challenges to plea proceedings for correction of errors at law."
We begin our analysis with an overview of how our supervisory orders temporarily changed our traditional guilty plea procedure. We then review the State's argument that we lack jurisdiction under section 814.6(1)(a )(3) to hear this appeal. After concluding we have jurisdiction, we review our authority to issue supervisory orders during the COVID-19 pandemic and Basquin's separation of powers and due process claims. To the extent Basquin blames his lawyer for his guilty plea, his ineffective assistance of counsel claim must be presented in postconviction proceedings. See Iowa Code § 814.7 ; State v. Tucker , 959 N.W.2d 140, 152 (Iowa 2021) ().
A. Our Supervisory Orders. Our rules of criminal procedure require guilty pleas to class "C" felonies to be accepted through in-person proceedings in open court with a face-to-face colloquy between the district court judge, defendant, and counsel. Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.8(2)(b ) provides:
To continue reading
Request your trial
- State v. Thoren
-
State v. Hanes
...first instance." Treptow , 960 N.W.2d at 103 (quoting State v. Tucker , 959 N.W.2d 140, 152 (Iowa 2021) ).2 See generally State v. Basquin , 970 N.W.2d 643 (Iowa 2022) (rejecting constitutional challenge to written guilty pleas for felonies allowed under temporary COVID-19 supervisory order......
-
State v. Hanes
... ... postconviction-relief proceedings and requires they be ... resolved there in the first instance." Treptow , ... 960 N.W.2d at 103 (quoting State v. Tucker , 959 ... N.W.2d 140, 152 (Iowa 2021)) ... [ 2 ] See generally State v ... Basquin , 970 N.W.2d 643 (Iowa 2022) (rejecting ... constitutional challenge to written guilty pleas for felonies ... allowed under temporary COVID-19 supervisory orders) ... [ 3 ] The dissent relies primarily on Iowa ... Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.8(2)( b ), which states ... ...
-
State v. Hayden
... ... (internal citations omitted). "Absent a written plea ... of guilty describing all the matters set forth in the ... rule, noncompliance with oral requirements of the rule ... normally constitutes reversible error." Id. at ... 542 (emphasis added). Cf. State v. Basquin, 970 ... N.W.2d 643, 659 (Iowa 2022) ("We have long utilized ... written guilty pleas for misdemeanor offenses, and we have ... held the defendants can waive in writing the right to an ... in-person colloquy in open court.") ... Each of ... ...