State v. Roby
| Decision Date | 20 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 19-0551,19-0551 |
| Citation | 951 N.W.2d 459 |
| Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Christopher ROBY, Appellant. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Marti D. Nerenstone, Council Bluffs, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Louis S. Sloven, Assistant Attorney General, Brian J. Williams, County Attorney, and Elizabeth O'Donnell and Yeshimebet Abebe, Assistant County Attorneys, for appellee.
In this appeal, we must decide whether a defendant, simply by paying a speeding ticket, can avoid a charge of eluding while speeding for the same police chase. The defendant, then age seventeen, received a speeding citation to which he pled guilty without pleading guilty to his accompanying charge of eluding. Months later after he turned eighteen, the State formally charged him by trial information with eluding while speeding. On advice of counsel, the defendant pled guilty to the eluding charge and several unrelated offenses.
On appeal, the defendant's new counsel argues that speeding is a lesser included offense of eluding while speeding and that his first lawyer was ineffective for failing to challenge the eluding charge on double jeopardy grounds. We transferred the case to the court of appeals, which rejected his double jeopardy claim and other issues raised on appeal. We granted the defendant's application for further review.
On our review, we determine that speeding is a lesser included offense that at trial would merge into a conviction for eluding while speeding. Double jeopardy principles generally prohibit a second punishment for the same offense. Here, however, the defendant pled guilty to speeding, a scheduled violation, without a prosecutor present or any agreement to dismiss or foreclose the eluding charge. The defendant also had received notice of an eluding charge. Under these circumstances, we hold that the defendant cannot use double jeopardy principles as a sword to defeat the more serious eluding charge. We let the court of appeals decision stand on the defendant's other claims and affirm his convictions and sentences.
On October 23, 2017, Sergeant Steve Bose was driving his marked police patrol car in Waterloo when he noticed a silver Chevy Impala with fresh front-end damage traveling in the opposite direction. Sergeant Bose executed a U-turn to investigate further. As he did so, the Impala rapidly accelerated. Sergeant Bose activated his emergency lights, and the driver failed to stop. Sergeant Bose next activated his siren, but the driver sped away.
During the ensuing chase, the driver drove off the roadway and through the lawns of three homes. The Impala reached speeds of fifty-five miles per hour in a twenty-five-mile-per-hour zone. The driver eventually ditched the Impala in a backyard and fled on foot. Sergeant Bose radioed the driver's description and stayed with the Impala and its passengers. Another officer apprehended the driver, identified as Christopher Lee Roby Jr., then age seventeen.
The police report shows Roby was charged with eluding and interference with official acts and was issued citations for driving without a license, reckless driving, and speeding. As a minor, he was released to his mother without being held to answer for the eluding charge. In November, Roby, still age seventeen, pled guilty to driving without a license, speeding, and reckless driving, all of which are scheduled violations. There was no reported hearing involving a prosecutor. Nor did the State agree to forgo the eluding charge. To the contrary, on May 23, 2018, after Roby turned eighteen, the State filed a criminal complaint for the eluding charge and a magistrate issued an arrest warrant.
Officers learned that Roby was staying with his girlfriend, Tiara Bell, who drove a black 2013 Chevy Malibu. Officers saw Roby and Bell leave her apartment and get into the Chevy. As officers spoke with Roby and Bell, they smelled a "fresh green" odor of marijuana on Roby and Bell and searched them but found nothing. Bell told the officers that there was marijuana inside the apartment. Officers obtained a search warrant for the apartment and located a small plastic bag of marijuana by the bed where Roby slept and a larger bag of marijuana on the TV stand in the bedroom. Bell told the officers that they shared the marijuana but that "Roby gets the weed."
On June 5, the State filed a trial information that charged Roby with eluding—speed over twenty-five miles per hour over the limit pursuant to Iowa Code section 321.279(2) (2017)—based on the October 23, 2017 police chase. On July 11, the State filed a criminal complaint that charged Roby with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, and on August 16, the State filed a trial information with the same charge.
On August 30, personnel at Allen Hospital contacted child protection workers at the Iowa Department of Human Services to report the admission of a thirteen-year-old patient who was around eight weeks pregnant. At the Allen Child Protection Center, the patient disclosed that she had sex with Roby several times. Roby admitted having sex with the victim after his eighteenth birthday. On September 26, the State filed a criminal complaint charging Roby with third-degree sexual abuse, and on October 5, the State filed a trial information with the same charge.
On March 28, 2019, Roby pled guilty to the eluding charge and agreed to a two-year sentence. On that same date, Roby pled guilty to the other charges. The court sentenced Roby to five years for the possession charge and ten years for the sexual abuse charge, with all sentences to run concurrently.
Roby filed this direct appeal, raising multiple issues, including that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge his eluding charge on double jeopardy grounds based on his guilty plea to speeding in the same incident. We transferred the case to the court of appeals, which affirmed Roby's convictions. The court of appeals held that Roby failed to establish a double jeopardy violation and rejected his other claims. Roby applied for further review, which we granted.
"On further review, we have the discretion to review all or some of the issues raised on appeal or in the application for further review." State v. Clay , 824 N.W.2d 488, 494 (Iowa 2012). We choose to review only the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim regarding double jeopardy. We let the court of appeals decision stand as our final decision regarding the remaining issues.
We review an alleged failure to merge convictions as required by statute for correction of errors at law. State v. West , 924 N.W.2d 502, 504 (Iowa 2019) ; State v. Love , 858 N.W.2d 721, 723 (Iowa 2015). We review constitutional double jeopardy claims de novo. State v. Lindell , 828 N.W.2d 1, 4 (Iowa 2013). "Our review of claims of ineffective assistance of counsel is de novo." State v. Ortiz , 905 N.W.2d 174, 179 (Iowa 2017).
Roby argues that speeding is a lesser included offense of eluding while speeding and that upon his guilty plea to speeding, the State could no longer prosecute him for eluding. We must therefore decide whether speeding merges with eluding while speeding and, if so, whether Roby's guilty plea to speeding constitutes a double jeopardy bar to the eluding charge such that his former counsel provided constitutionally defective representation by allowing him to plead guilty to eluding.1
The State argues that we should preserve Roby's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims for future postconviction-relief proceedings. We may address ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims "when the record is sufficient to permit a ruling." State v. Wills , 696 N.W.2d 20, 22 (Iowa 2005). We conclude that the record is adequate to address Roby's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim based on the merits of his double jeopardy argument.
In order to establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant "must demonstrate (1) his trial counsel failed to perform an essential duty, and (2) this failure resulted in prejudice." State v. Straw , 709 N.W.2d 128, 133 (Iowa 2006). For the reasons explained below, we find that Roby's double jeopardy claim lacks merit, and therefore, his counsel breached no duty.
A. Whether Speeding Is a Lesser Included Offense of Eluding While Speeding. We have not previously addressed whether speeding is a lesser included offense that merges with eluding while speeding. To answer this question, we begin with the applicable statutes. Iowa Code section 701.9 provides, "No person shall be convicted of a public offense which is necessarily included in another public offense of which the person is convicted." This statute "codifies the double jeopardy protection against cumulative punishments." State v. Halliburton , 539 N.W.2d 339, 344 (Iowa 1995). "The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits multiple punishments for the same offense" and thereby "prevents a court from imposing a greater punishment than the legislature intended." Id. (emphasis added).2 The legislature defines the offenses and can provide for multiple punishments for separate offenses that overlap. See State v. Johnson , 950 N.W.2d 21, 24 (Iowa 2020). "If the Double Jeopardy Clause is not violated because the legislature intended double punishment, section 701.9 is not applicable and merger is not required." Halliburton , 539 N.W.2d at 344.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wermerskirchen v. Canadian Nat'l R.R.
...we have the discretion to review all or some of the issues raised on appeal or in the application for further review." State v. Roby , 951 N.W.2d 459, 463 (Iowa 2020) (quoting State v. Clay , 824 N.W.2d 488, 494 (Iowa 2012) ). We choose to review only the ruling granting summary judgment on......
-
Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Akpan
... ... In 1998, Akpan received a bachelor's degree in political science from Weber State University in Ogden, Utah. In 2003, Akpan graduated from Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University, located in Houston, Texas ... ...
-
Borst Bros. Constr., Inc. v. Fin. of Am. Commercial, LLC
...in the application for further review." Wermerskirchen v. Canadian Nat'l R.R. , 955 N.W.2d 822, 827 (Iowa 2021) (quoting State v. Roby , 951 N.W.2d 459, 463 (Iowa 2020) ). Here, we choose to review only two issues: (1) the validity and priority of the subcontractors’ mechanics’ liens, as to......
-
McGrew v. Otoadese
...in the application for further review." Wermerskirchen v. Canadian Nat'l R.R. , 955 N.W.2d 822, 827 (Iowa 2021) (quoting State v. Roby , 951 N.W.2d 459, 463 (Iowa 2020) ). The McGrews applied for further review only on the expert disclosure issue and we choose to review only that issue. The......