State v. Iowa Dist. Court for Dubuque Cnty.
| Citation | 870 N.W.2d 849 |
| Decision Date | 23 October 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 14–2161.,14–2161. |
| Parties | STATE of Iowa, Plaintiff, v. IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR DUBUQUE COUNTY, Defendant. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Iowa |
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Martha E. Trout, Assistant Attorney General, Ralph R. Potter, County Attorney, and Brigit M. Barnes, Assistant County Attorney, for plaintiff.
Sandra P. Trevino of Hammer, Simon & Jensen, P.C., East Dubuque, Illinois, for defendant.
In this case of first impression, we are asked to decide whether under the facts presented here, the district court was correct in granting the motion for recusal or disqualification of the individual prosecuting attorney and the entire Dubuque County Attorney's Office in its prosecution of the defendant. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that the district court's decision to disqualify the individual prosecuting attorney constituted an abuse of discretion. Consequently, it was likewise unnecessary to disqualify the entire Dubuque County Attorney's Office. The writ of certiorari is sustained, and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
On June 21, 2011, Dubuque police received a report of a woman armed with a knife and threatening suicide. Officer Jason Pace was dispatched to the scene. Upon arrival, Officer Pace was informed that the subject of the report was Koreen Erickson. He was also advised that other residents on the street had disarmed Erickson and she had left the area on foot.
Officer Pace was able to locate Erickson, and he attempted to approach her. Erickson immediately and repeatedly began yelling at him that she wanted to die and she wanted him to shoot her. Erickson then threatened to take Officer Pace's gun. Erickson yelled, “I'm going to take your f* *king gun,” and then charged Officer Pace and reached for the loaded handgun he was wearing on his right hip. Officer Pace and Officer Chad Leitzen immediately subdued Erickson and took her into custody. After being interviewed by the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), Erickson was released from custody on an unsecured appearance bond under the pretrial supervision of DCS on the condition she comply with all mental health treatment recommendations.
The trial information was filed on June 24 charging Erickson with disarm(ing) or attempt to disarm a peace officer of a dangerous weapon in violation of Iowa Code sections 708.13(1) and 708.13(2) (2011). Assistant County Attorney Brigit M. Barnes filed the trial information and represented the State of Iowa in Erickson's prosecution.1
The State and Erickson ultimately reached a plea agreement in this matter, and plea proceedings were scheduled for August 29, 2012. Erickson was going to plead to the lesser charge of interference with official acts. However, on her written guilty plea, Erickson indicated in her own handwriting that she did not want to give up her trial rights. She also wrote that she was suffering from a mental disability at the time of the offense. The district court continued the plea hearing and requested more information on the factual basis for the plea. A new plea hearing was set for September 19. On September 19, Erickson requested that new counsel be appointed due to a breakdown in communication. The court appointed new counsel and rescheduled the trial for October 1.
Shortly thereafter, Erickson filed a notice of special defenses which raised the defense of insanity. A hearing was conducted on October 29. As a result of that hearing, and pursuant to Iowa Code section 812.3, the court suspended further proceedings in the case and ordered Erickson to undergo a competency evaluation. Upon completion of the competency evaluation, a competency hearing was conducted on October 24, 2013. Following the hearing, the district court determined that Erickson was not competent to stand trial and the proceedings remained suspended indefinitely. A placement hearing was held on March 12, 2014. At the conclusion of the hearing, the district court found that Erickson did not pose any danger to the public peace or safety. Erickson remained free on the unsecured appearance bond, and she was ordered to continue attending counseling and taking her prescribed medication. On May 15, the State filed a motion for a hearing on Erickson's competency status, and a status hearing on Erickson's competency was set for July 30.
On May 30, Erickson attended the bond review hearing for her boyfriend, James Evilsizer. Barnes also represented the State in the case against Evilsizer. After the hearing, the district court denied his requested relief, and Evilsizer was returned to the Dubuque County jail. Later that day, Erickson visited Evilsizer at the jail. The conversation between the two was video recorded. During the recorded conversation, Erickson made multiple disparaging remarks about Barnes. Erickson called Barnes a “c*nt,” a “biased c*nt,” and “literally Satan.”
Erickson also made remarks that could be taken as threats against Barnes. After Evilsizer told Erickson that her horoscope for the day said she was going to have a romantic evening, Erickson responded, “Yeah, with a sniper rifle for the State.” Later in the conversation, Erickson told Evilsizer, “I'm on the verge of going and buying a sniper rifle and just shooting this chick in her face.” When the two were discussing Erickson seeing Barnes after Evilsizer's bond hearing, Erickson said she had thought,
Erickson also told Evilsizer that she was going to “get [Barnes] disbarred” by reporting her to the “judicial disciplinary committee” and that the committee would “rip her apart.” In addition to the remarks about the assistant county attorney, Erickson told Evilsizer that she was “about to snap the f*ck out,” that the State was “pushing [her] over the edge,” and that she was “borderline suicidal.”
After being alerted to the recorded conversation, the State filed a motion to revoke Erickson's bond and to review the status of her competency. In support of its motion, the State referenced Erickson's disparaging statements regarding Barnes and the threat to shoot her with a sniper rifle. The State argued these statements demonstrated that Erickson was a danger to the public. The district court ordered Erickson's bond be revoked and a warrant issued for her arrest. After her arrest, Erickson's bond was set at $25,000, cash only. The district court also ordered an additional competency evaluation.2
After a status review hearing on August 1, the district court ordered that Erickson be immediately released from custody upon the execution of a $10,000 unsecured appearance bond. Erickson was ordered to continue with pretrial monitoring and mental health treatment. An additional competency evaluation was performed and a report issued which indicated that Erickson was now competent to stand trial. The district court held a second competency hearing on October 20. Based upon the report, and with Erickson's consent, the district court found that Erickson was competent to stand trial and the court set the matter for trial.
On October 24, Erickson filed a motion for recusal or disqualification of both Barnes individually and the entire Dubuque County Attorney's Office. In support of her motion, Erickson argued (1) Barnes should be recused because the bond revocation only occurred due to alleged threats made to her personal safety, (2) Barnes should be recused because she may be emotionally involved in Erickson's case in a way that would make it difficult for her to act impartially, and (3) the entire Dubuque County Attorney's Office should be disqualified because Barnes' emotional involvement in the prosecution could create a conflict of interest with other attorneys in the office. At a hearing on the motion to recuse, Erickson's counsel argued that Erickson's bond would not have been revoked if the statements Erickson made had been directed at someone other than a county attorney. Barnes responded that she would have filed a motion to revoke Erickson's bond for being a danger to the community regardless of the person against whom the threat was made.
The order also required the Dubuque County Attorney to find someone from an adjoining county to represent the State.
The State filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which we granted.
“The question of whether a conflict exists is a mixed question of fact and law.” State v. McKinley, 860 N.W.2d 874, 878 (Iowa 2015). “ ‘Whether the facts show an actual conflict of interest or a serious potential for conflict is a matter of trial court discretion....’ ” Id. (quoting Pippins v. State, 661 N.W.2d 544, 548 (Iowa 2003) ). “We review these conflict-of-interest determinations for an abuse of discretion.” Id.; State v. Smith, 761 N.W.2d 63, 68 (Iowa 2009). “ ‘An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court exercises its discretion “on grounds or for reasons clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable.” ’ ” State v. Webster, 865 N.W.2d 223, 231 (Iowa 2015) (quoting State v. Rodriquez, 636 N.W.2d 234, 239 (Iowa 2001) ). “ ‘A ground or reason is untenable when it is not supported by substantial evidence or when it is based on an erroneous application of the law.’ ” Rodriquez, 636 N.W.2d at 239 (quoting Graber v. City of Ankeny, 616 N.W.2d 633, 638 (Iowa 2000) ).
A. Disqualification of the Individual Assistant County Attorney. In order to determine...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re 2018 Grand Jury of Dall. Cnty.
...this court reviews a district court’s decision not to disqualify a prosecutor for abuse of discretion. State v. Iowa Dist. Ct. for Dubuque Cty. , 870 N.W.2d 849, 850, 853 (Iowa 2015). The district court’s interpretation of statutory language is reviewed for errors of law. State v. Dahl , 87......
- State v. Walden, 14–1280.