State v. Harrison
Decision Date | 26 March 1997 |
Docket Number | No. 95-1366,95-1366 |
Citation | 561 N.W.2d 28 |
Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Donald HARRISON, Appellant. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and Ahmet S. Gonlubol, Assistant State Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Ann E. Brenden, Assistant Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and James P. Ward, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by McGIVERIN, C.J., and LARSON, LAVORATO, NEUMAN, and ANDREASEN, JJ.
Donald Harrison appeals his conviction of second-degree theft in violation of Iowa Code section 714.1(4) (1993). He argues that theft by exercising control over stolen property is not a continuing offense for purposes of the statute of limitations set forth in Iowa Code section 802.3; therefore, the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss. We reverse.
On May 21, 1993, police executed a search warrant for Harrison's property and found stolen construction equipment. On December 29, 1993, Harrison was charged by trial information with the offense of theft by exercising control over stolen property in violation of section 714.1(4).
Harrison filed a motion to dismiss the trial information on the basis that it was not timely filed pursuant to section 802.3 ( ). He argued that all or a portion of the property alleged to have been stolen was stolen more than three years prior to December 29, 1993. The State resisted the motion, contending that theft by exercising control over stolen property is a continuing offense and that Harrison possessed the property until the search warrant was executed on May 21, 1993.
The district court overruled the motion, agreeing with the State that theft by exercising control over stolen property is a continuing offense. The court concluded Harrison did not stop exercising control over the stolen property until May 21, 1993; therefore, the statute of limitations had not yet run when the trial information was filed against him.
A jury found Harrison guilty of second-degree theft. The court granted him a suspended, indeterminate five-year sentence with probation.
Citing State v. Hippler, 545 N.W.2d 568, 572 (Iowa 1996), decided after the district court's ruling, Harrison argues on appeal that theft by exercising control over stolen property is not a continuing offense; therefore, the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss. He requests his conviction be reversed and his case remanded for new trial.
The State urges us to overrule Hippler to the extent that it is inconsistent with State v. Post, 286 N.W.2d 195 (Iowa 1979), and case law in other jurisdictions.
"The proper meaning of a statute is a legal question." Hippler, 545 N.W.2d at 570. Our review is at law. Id.
The United States Supreme Court has stated that a particular offense should not be construed as a continuing one "unless the explicit language of the substantive criminal statute compels such a conclusion, or the nature of the crime involved is such that Congress must assuredly have intended that it be treated as a continuing one." Toussie v. United States, 397 U.S. 112, 115, 90 S.Ct. 858, 860, 25 L.Ed.2d 156, 161 (1970). In Hippler, we determined neither the express language of the criminal statute nor the nature of the crime compelled a conclusion that theft by exercising control over stolen property be treated as a continuing offense for the purposes of the statute of limitations. Hippler, 545 N.W.2d at 572.
We explained the policy reasons behind our conclusion that theft was not a continuing offense, noting that if we were to hold otherwise, prosecutions could be brought years after the original taking and would involve stale evidence. Id. at 573. Such prosecutions would "put defendants in the untenable position of not being able to obtain evidence for a proper defense." Id.
As the State notes, some jurisdictions have reached a contrary conclusion. See United States v. Fleetwood, 489 F.Supp. 129, 131-32 (D.Or.1980) ( ); State v. Reeves, 264 Ark. 622, 574 S.W.2d 647, 649 (1978) ( ); State v. Temple, 65 Haw. 261, 650 P.2d 1358, 1362 (1982) ( ); State v. Lawrence, 312 N.W.2d 251, 253 (Minn.1981) ( ); Commonwealth v. Farrar, 271 Pa.Super. 434, 413 A.2d 1094, 1098 (1979) ( ); State v. Lodermeier, 481 N.W.2d 614, 620-21 (S.D.1992) ( ).
However, many jurisdictions support our holding in Hippler and we are satisfied that we reached the correct conclusion. See People v. Kimbro, 182 Ill.App.3d 572, 131 Ill.Dec. 451, 538 N.E.2d 826, 828 (1989) ( ); State v. Gainer, 227 Kan. 670, 608 P.2d 968, 971 (1980) ( ); State v. Mullin, 268 Mont. 214, 886 P.2d 376, 378 (1994) ( ); State v. Nuss, 235 Neb. 107, 454 N.W.2d 482, 487 (1990) ( ). See generally Annotation, Possession of Stolen Property as Continuing Offense, 24 A.L.R.5th 132 (1994)....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Tipton
...after Hippler , we revisited the continuing offenses question in the context of the statute of limitations in State v. Harrison , 561 N.W.2d 28 (Iowa 1997) (per curiam). In Harrison , the defendant was charged with theft by exercising control over stolen property. Id. at 28. The property wa......
-
People v. Zuniga
...actions at a particular point in time); People v. Kimbro, 182 Ill.App.3d 572, 131 Ill.Dec. 451, 538 N.E.2d 826 (1989); State v. Harrison, 561 N.W.2d 28 (Iowa 1997)(theft by exercising control over stolen property is not a continuing offense for statute of limitations purposes); State v. Gai......
-
State v. Taylor
...Courts in our sister states have reached the same conclusion with regard to similarly worded statutes. See, e.g., State v. Harrison, 561 N.W.2d 28, 29 (Iowa 1997) (per curiam); State v. Gainer, 227 Kan. 670, 608 P.2d 968, 971 (1980) ; State v. Mullin, 268 Mont. 214, 886 P.2d 376, 378 (1994)......
-
People v. Lawson
...State v. Saathoff, 29 P.3d 236 [Sup. Ct. Alaska 2001] ; State v. Webb, 311 So.2d 190 [Florida Dist. Ct. App. 1975] ; State v. Harrison, 561 N.W.2d 28 [Sup. Ct. Iowa 1997] ). In Florida and Alaska, however, the stolen property statutes are similar to the old New York Penal Law § 1308; it is ......