State v. Meyers
Decision Date | 31 January 2020 |
Docket Number | No. 18-2222,18-2222 |
Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Jeffrey Alan MEYERS, Appellant. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Robert G. Rehkemper of Gourley, Rehkemper & Lindholm, P.L.C., West Des Moines, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Thomas J. Ogden, Assistant Attorney General, Brenna Bird, County Attorney, and Timothy D. Benton, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
This "blue light special" presents an important question about the status of Lake Panorama and several other recreational lakes in the State of Iowa that were created by damming our rivers.
On a midsummer evening, two officers of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) were patrolling Lake Panorama. They observed a pontoon boat displaying blue lights. They stopped the boat for violating Iowa Code section 462A.12(4) (2018). That statute provides, "No person shall operate on the waters of this state under the jurisdiction of the conservation commission any vessel displaying or reflecting a blue light or flashing blue light unless such vessel is an authorized emergency vessel." Id.
The stop revealed that the operator of the boat appeared to be intoxicated. He was arrested and ultimately convicted of boating while intoxicated in violation of Iowa Code section 462A.14(1). Before trial, he filed a motion to suppress, asserting that Lake Panorama was not "waters of this state under the jurisdiction of the conservation commission." See id. § 462A.12(4). Therefore, he argued, section 462A.12(4) did not apply and there was no probable cause for the stop. The district court denied the motion to suppress, but it forms the basis for the current appeal.
On appeal, we hold that the officers had probable cause to stop the operator’s vessel because the DNR has jurisdiction over Lake Panorama and it is not a "privately owned lake" as defined in section 462A.2(31). See id. § 462A.2(31). When Lake Panorama was created in 1970 by damming the Middle Raccoon River, it remained accessible to the public by boat coming down the river from the northwest. Although the property owners association has attempted to block off that access, this does not change the character of the body of water as belonging to the people of Iowa. Accordingly, we affirm the operator’s conviction.
On the evening of July 7, 2018, two conservation officers employed by the DNR were participating in a "saturation patrol" on Lake Panorama. The patrol involved several officers in boats enforcing the navigation laws on the lake. The boats had been launched from a slip rented to the DNR by the Lake Panorama Association (LPA), an association of private property owners who own the land around the lake.
At around 10:45 p.m., the officers observed a pontoon boat displaying blue lights. The boat was being operated by the defendant, Jeffrey Meyers, and had eight passengers, including four young children. The officers stopped the boat for violating Iowa Code section 462A.12(4), which prohibits the display of a blue light by a vessel operating in "the waters of this state under the jurisdiction of the conservation commission." The officers proceeded to do a routine safety inspection of the vessel, looking for required equipment. One of the officers, who had closer contact with Meyers, noticed he had "some slurred speech, bloodshot watery eyes, [and] smelled of alcohol." There was an open beer container at his position on the boat. When Meyers was asked to retrieve the fire extinguisher, he fumbled the latch. Meyers failed field sobriety tests and a preliminary breath test. He was arrested. At the Guthrie County Sheriff’s Office, a chemical test revealed that Meyers had a blood alcohol content of .173.
Meyers was charged with one count of boating while intoxicated in violation of Iowa Code section 462A.14(1) and four counts of child endangerment in violation of Iowa Code section 726.6(1)(a ). He moved to suppress the results of the July 7 stop, urging that it violated both the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution. Specifically, Meyers maintained the stop was unlawful because the prohibition on operating a vessel with a blue light applied only to "waters of this state under the jurisdiction of the conservation commission," a term that excludes "privately owned lakes." See Iowa Code § 462A.2(22) (defining "navigable waters"); id. § 462A.2(31) (defining "privately owned lake"); id. § 462A.2(45) ( ); id. § 462A.12(4) ( ). Meyers asserted that Lake Panorama is a privately owned lake. See id. § 462A.2(31).
Lake Panorama is now about fifty years old. In 1970, with the permission of the state, the Middle Raccoon River was dammed near Panora by a group of private property owners, creating Lake Panorama. At present, all of the property surrounding the lake is privately owned and every owner of lakefront property is a member of the LPA. The LPA owns the dam. The LPA also owns the bed under the lake, as well as the lake’s only marina and boat ramp. Use of the boat ramp is limited to LPA members.1 The LPA has put up signs stating that Lake Panorama is a "private lake." The LPA also conducts its own patrols of the lake and has its own boating regulations, which it enforces.
However, the Middle Raccoon River still flows into the lake, and the public can access the river at Springbrook State Park above the lake. At the suppression hearing, a DNR officer testified that when he was on duty in 2006 and 2007, he would put into the river at the state park so he could enter Lake Panorama in his boat for enforcement purposes unannounced.
Also, a river still flows out of the lake. There is an outlet at the dam that allows water to keep flowing, as the Middle Raccoon River continues south and east until it joins the South Raccoon River in Dallas County.
At the suppression hearing, evidence was presented that the LPA has put up a barrier at the northwest end of the lake near where the Middle Raccoon River flows into the lake in order to catch debris. When the barrier was installed, the DNR directed the LPA to move it so it would not interfere with navigation between the river and the lake.2
The court then discussed the legal significance of the LPA’s actions:
Thereafter, Meyers stipulated to a trial on the minutes of testimony. The court found Meyers guilty of boating while intoxicated, imposed sentence, and dismissed the child endangerment counts.
Meyers filed his notice of appeal, and we retained the appeal.
Our review of constitutional claims is de novo. State v. Pettijohn , 899 N.W.2d 1, 12 (Iowa 2017). However, our review is for correction of errors at law to the extent the constitutional claims raise issues of statutory interpretation. Id. ; see State v. Harrison , 846 N.W.2d 362, 365 (Iowa 2014).
As noted, the blue-light prohibition applies to "the waters of this state under the jurisdiction of the conservation commission." Iowa Code § 462A.12(4). Is Lake Panorama such a water? That is the salient issue on appeal.
To put it another way, this case presents the question whether the waters of Lake Panorama belong to all the people of Iowa or only to the group of private property owners who own the land surrounding and underneath the lake itself.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Iowa Citizens for Cmty. Improvement v. State
...of private property owners could not convert a navigable stream to their own private lake simply by blocking access to it. See 938 N.W.2d 205, 210–12 (Iowa 2020).Many of our cases contain language that the public trust doctrine protects public "use" of public trust property. For example, in......
-
Iowa Citizens for Cmty. Improvement & Food & Water Watch v. State
...a group of private property owners could not convert a navigable stream to their own private lake simply by blocking access to it. See 938 N.W.2d 205, 210-12 (Iowa 2020). Many of our cases contain language that the public trust doctrine protects public "use" of public trust property. For ex......
-
State v. Dessinger
...Constitution and article I, section 10 of the Iowa Constitution. We review claims of constitutional violations de novo. State v. Meyers , 938 N.W.2d 205, 208 (Iowa 2020). Ineffective-assistance claims are also reviewed de novo. State v. Gordon , 943 N.W.2d 1, 3 (Iowa 2020). Finally, Dessing......
-
Luthi v. Neis
...... errors at law." Id . "The district. court's interpretation of Iowa Code section 804.20 is. reviewed for errors at law." State v. Walker ,. 804 N.W.2d 284, 289 (Iowa 2011). The appropriateness of the. district court's decision turns on the correctness of its. interpretation of the relevant statutes. State v. Meyers , 938 N.W.2d 205, 208 (Iowa 2020); State v. Mathias , 936 N.W.2d 222, 226 (Iowa 2019). . 5 . . Summary. ......