State v. Donelson

• Citation: 302 N.W.2d 125
• Decision Date: 18 February 1981
• Docket Number: No. 63595,63595
• Parties: STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Quinton L. DONELSON, Appellant.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Iowa

Page 125

302 N.W.2d 125

STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Quinton L. DONELSON, Appellant.

No. 63595.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Feb. 18, 1981.

Jerald W. Kinnamon and Jon M. Kinnamon, Cedar Rapids, and Walter D. Braud and Dennis A. DePorter, Rock Island, Ill., for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Atty. Gen., Richard L. Cleland, Asst. Atty. Gen., and William E. Davis, Scott County Atty., for appellee.

Considered en banc.

UHLENHOPP, Justice.

This criminal appeal involves five issues which arose in a first-degree sexual abuse prosecution of defendant Quinton L. Donelson. Defendant's companion on the occasion in question was Darren Dooms.

The jury could find from the evidence in defendant's trial that defendant and Dooms, juveniles aged 15, were together on the day of the events. In the afternoon they had a pizza and beer. At some later time defendant sniffed white powder called "angel dust." At about 7:00 p. m. they went to a junior high football game, and at approximately 8:00 p. m. they went to an establishment called Shakey's.

Dooms had a switchblade knife which he had been carrying all day. He was a State's witness at defendant's trial. He testified in part:

A. Well, it was about 8 o'clock so we started to leave because and we started to walk, go down Thirty-sixth Street and there was a girl up up there and he (defendant) asked to see my knife.

* * *

* * *

And he asked to see my knife. And so I thought he was just going to look at it again, like he was all day, so I give it to him. There was a girl up ahead and, down here somewheres, and we was just on Thirty-sixth and he said he was going to get her or something. And then he took off running after her and I yelled at him and turned around and she ran into the street and he grabbed her. And I ran up, a little farther up by some parked buses and then I seen him by the fence and what looked like he stabbed her. So I ran back and by that time he was out in the field somewheres; about out in the middle, I would say.

Q. What did you do? A. Well, I was trying to tell him to leave her alone and stuff and tell him to come on and I asked him what he was going to do with her and where he was going to take her. And he tripped her and said, "Right here;" and it was about in the middle of the field.

* * *

* * *

Q. Then what happened? A. Then he tripped her on the ground and told her to take off her clothes and she said, "Is that all you're going to do," and he didn't answer her. And then I told her he wasn't going to hurt her. And then, after they got her clothes off, he got on top of her and told me to get the money out of her purse. And I just dumped the stuff out of her purse and didn't take no money, just a couple pennies, I think it was about 15 cents at the most.

Q. Did he take any of his clothes off? A. No.

Q. Did he open his trousers in any way? A. Yeah.

Q. In what way did he do it? A. He just unsnapped his pants and unzipped 'em.

Q. Before he did that, did he force her to do anything? A. No.

Q. Nothing happened before he got on top of her? A. Well, he well, him and her was having problems getting her pants off and he told me to unhook them from her shoe and so I did. And then he got on top of her.

Q. Do you remember any oral sex being involved? A. Yes, I do.

Q. And when did that happen? A. After he got off her and then, and then it happened after that.

Q. Do you remember what he said in exact quotes if you can? A. I don't remember.

Q. Who had the knife all this time? A. He did.

Q. Did he have it open or closed? A. Had it open.

Q. And then what happened? A. And then he got up and picked up the knife and told me to get on top of her.

Q. Did you? A. Well, yeah. I was scared and I really didn't know what I was doing so I did.

Q. Did you take your pants down? A. No.

Q. Did you open your pants? A. I started to, but

Q. Did you expose your penis? A. I don't think so.

Q. Do you remember? A. At that point, I was just too scared. I don't remember.

Q. Who had the knife then? A. He did.

Q. What do you mean by oral sex? A. Well, he stuck his penis in her mouth.

Q. Did he have the knife then? A. Yeah.

Q. And then what happened? A. Then he said he got back up and after I then after he told me to then when I came to my senses, then when I knew what I was doing, she told me she was hurt and her back was hurting. So I tried to help her and I took off her coat so I could see how bad her back was hurt and it was pretty bloody and I got really scared then. And he said the last girl narced him off and he said he was going to kill her and I said, "No, don't do that." And he said, "Well, then I'm going to knock her out." And I said, "No," and she started crying and said "No;" and the knife was pretty big and it would have probably killed her just by hitting her. And I said, "No, don't do that." I said, "Tie her up with her clothes." And he stuck the knife in the ground or something and I picked it up and put it in my back pocket.

Q. Did you ask him for the knife? A. No, he just stuck it in the ground.

And after he stuck it in the ground, I picked it up and I told him she laid on her belly and he started to tie her feet and I started to tie her hands and he acted like he was having trouble tying them. So he asked me for the knife back I thought he was going to cut the clothes or something to tie her up and I gave it back to him. And he got her hands tied around her feet and I got up and started to leave and I turned around and looked and he had his hand raised over her back, and it was like he was going to stab her in the back. And I said, "What are you going to do," and he said the last girl narced him off and he was going to kill her. I grabbed his hand and yanked him away and told him, let's just get out of there. So we took off running, we went around the regular football field, over behind the car sales place, and went around it to the creek and I told him to give me the knife and he did and I threw it and

Q. Where did you throw it? A. Towards the creek. I don't

Q. What creek is that? Do you know? A. I think it is Duck Creek.

When the time arrived for cross-examination of Dooms, defense counsel desired to show a plea bargain by the State and Dooms. Counsel claimed that in return for Dooms' testimony at defendant's trial, the State agreed to reduce the charge against Dooms from first-degree sexual abuse, which carries a mandatory life sentence, to an aggravated misdemeanor which carries imprisonment not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding $5000 or both. §§ 902.1, 903.1(1), The Code 1979. The State's position in the trial court was that defendant should "avoid the use of sentencing or penalty or the penalty of any other crime of any other co-defendant...." The trial court ruled as follows:

The Court: I want to outline for defense counsel some of the parameters concerning cross-examination of this witness as it concerns and relates to the charge that is pending against the witness and what type of penalty it might carry as opposed to the charge that he might be allowed to plead guilty to and the penalty that it might entail.

This is a very sensitive issue concerning whether or not the Jury should have knowledge of the penalty involved in this crime. On the other hand, the defendant should be allowed considerable leeway in testing the credibility to give in defendant's (sic ) testimony and as it might be affected by a reduced charge and the Court has come to the conclusion that for the purpose of impeachment, and that's all, such cross-examination could go to the Jury. As to his credibility, it is not necessary that the Jury know the penalty involved in the crime to which he would be allowed to plead. The simple fact being if they know he is allowed to plead to a lesser charge and that the lesser charge would carry a lesser penalty, his credibility would be successfully impeached, at least to the extent it may be impeached by showing the motive he has for testifying. Understood?

Defense counsel stated:

Mr. Feuerbach: First of all, in regard to the issue of the defendant or Mr. Dooms, excuse me, receiving a lesser penalty in regard to his testimony today has already been touched upon by the State in its examination and should be allowed to be more fully explored by the defendant. Secondly, in citing case of State vs. Trost, 244 N.W.2d 556, Iowa 1976, I think the import of that case is that the defendant should have a right to fully explore any and all plea bargains and or the plea bargain process in regard to defendants or persons that are accomplices in the actual charge and I think also

The Court: 244 what, Mr. Feuerbach?

Mr. Feuerbach: 556. Also, I would state I think it does have a bearing on the impeachment issue to show exactly what Mr. Dooms is being the fact that he was being allowed to plead to a lesser charge may in fact mean only a slight reduction or it may mean a vast reduction in the minds of the Jury, so that they are able to judge exactly how great an impact that actually has as an impulse.

The Court: I would allow you to ask him, for instance, if it would be a misdemeanor or that it would be reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor. I think the only thing I haven't read your case yet, but I will. I think the only thing I want you to avoid is get before the Jury that the penalty involved in the crime charged against Mr. Donelson is life imprisonment. That would have a tremendous impact on the Jury. Punishment that might be imposed by the Court is not a matter for consideration. They are to decide the facts, whether or not the occasion happened in the way the State charged it; and it would, in my opinion, unduly prejudice and unduly influence by being made aware of the penalty. So that is the only restriction I am placing on your cross-examination.

In accordance with the court's ruling, defense counsel showed by Dooms that in consideration of Dooms' testimony, the State promised to reduce the charge against Dooms from a felony...