State v. Sidney

• Docket Number: 21-1866
• Decision Date: 25 October 2023
• Parties: STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ZACHARIAH COULEYON SIDNEY, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Iowa Court of Appeals

1

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ZACHARIAH COULEYON SIDNEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 21-1866

Court of Appeals of Iowa

October 25, 2023

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J Beattie, Judge.

The defendant challenges his convictions on five counts of sexual abuse in the third degree. AFFIRMED.

Gary Dickey of Dickey, Campbell, &Sahag Law Firm, PLC, Des Moines, for appellant.

Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Bridget A. Chambers, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.

GREER Presiding Judge.

A jury convicted Zachariah Sidney of five counts of third-degree sexual abuse against M.S.^[1] Sidney appeals, arguing (1) the court wrongly declared a mistrial over the parties' objections after learning Sidney had been exposed to COVID-19, which constituted an abuse of discretion and violated his right to be free from double jeopardy when he was tried and convicted by a different jury in a new trial; (2) the district court erred by giving an incomplete jury instruction defining the "by force or against will" element; and (3) the greater weight of the credible evidence does not support his convictions, so the district court should have granted his motion for new trial. Upon our review, we do not reach the merits of Sidney's claims about the court declaring a mistrial, we find no error in the challenged jury instruction, and also find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Sidney's motion for new trial. We affirm.

I. Background Facts and Proceedings.

Sidney was charged with five counts of third-degree sexual abuse against M.S., who was initially believed to be his daughter.^[2] Two of the charges were based on allegations Sidney engaged in sex acts with M.S before she was sixteen, while the other three were based on allegations Sidney engaged in sex acts with M.S. by force or against her will when she was sixteen or older. Sidney entered pleas of not guilty, and the case proceeded to a jury trial.

The case first went to trial in August 2021. On the second day-after the jury was impaneled and opening arguments were completed-the court was informed that Sidney had been exposed to COVID-19 and the unit where he was being held at the local jail was "going into a lockdown." Over the State's and Sidney's objection, the court sua sponte declared a mistrial, reasoning it was necessary for the "health of the community in general and the jury members in specific."

The second trial took place in October 2021. M.S. testified she went to live with Sidney in 2013, when she was twelve or thirteen^[3]-after first her mother and then her grandmother were no longer able to take care of her. M.S. lived with Sidney; his wife, Jackie; and their two sons in an apartment in Des Moines. She had been living with Sidney for only a few months when one night, while M.S. was sleeping in his bed after having a nightmare, Sidney used his hand to rub "up the back of [her] thigh to [her] butt." M.S. was shocked and asked Sidney what he was doing; he was teary-eyed and showed remorse. But then Sidney began sleeping in M.S.'s bed with her sometimes, telling his wife M.S. needed him because of her night terrors. Some nights Sidney would "rub himself against [her]" with their clothes on. As time progressed, Sidney began pulling both his and M.S.'s clothes down and then rubbing his penis against the outside of her vagina, anus, or both. According to M.S., Sidney also touched her vagina with his mouth and fingers. While the family lived in Des Moines, these incidents occurred a couple times each month.

Then, in the summer of 2015 (while M.S. was still fourteen and before her freshman year began), the family moved from Des Moines to Ankeny. After they moved to the new home, M.S. had her own bedroom-separate from Sidney and Jackie's sons. In this new home, the sexual contact continued but, according to M.S., it "stopped being just touching of a variety of parts, and it became actual penetration" with Sidney using his penis to penetrate M.S.'s vagina and anus. M.S. testified:

So as the relationship, both sexual and just a normal relationship, would progress, he became more aggressive with what he wanted out of me in both sexual relationships and as a daughter.

So the abuse would happen inside, like, during the sexual interaction or if he was just upset with me in general. So many times I'd get choked or slapped or shoved or pushed against the wall or objects.

When M.S. would tell Sidney she did not want the sexual encounters to happen anymore, he would get defensive and invoke religion. And Sidney justified his actions by telling M.S. he was having sexual contact with her to "correct [her]." When she became more insistent that it should stop, Sidney "would get more angry. If [she] asked to stop while [they] were actually having the sexual encounter, [she] suffered physical abuse, choking, pushing [her] head into the bed, slapping. He'd get angry and say mean things to [her] or call [her] derogatory names." This continued throughout M.S.'s high school years; while it started with Sidney occasionally sleeping in M.S.'s bed, "he'd sleep in [her] bed every day, and if not every day, most days out of the year" by the time she left for college.

M.S. testified that there were times she gave Sidney verbal permission for a sex act but did so because she did not feel "truly free to deny him permission." She testified that if she denied him:

He'd get really angry. At first, it would start with really derogatory terms, and then he actually put his hands on me aggressively, like slapping, choking, pushing my head into the bed or the pillow.

He would also ask me if I was seeing someone, and that's why I didn't want to share myself with him, and I wasn't. But I knew that if I didn't let him, he would think that, and I would have to suffer even more if he thought I had a boyfriend.

So a lot of times, it was really never me just-when he asked me and-it was never times as he asked, I would be-I'd have a positive response towards him. A lot of times, we'd argue for several minutes up to hours, and then I'd get tired, and I'd just say "okay."

When asked if there were times a sex act occurred without her saying "okay," M.S. testified that happened, adding, "Well, it wasn't like him forcing me down. I just turned away, and he'd just-he'd do it anyway."

M.S. moved out of the family home in Ankeny to go to college. While she was away, Sidney would contact M.S. through video calls and ask her to "show him [her] vagina and [her] butt and [her] breasts while he was back at home." And the sexual encounters continued to occur when M.S. was home.

Then, in December 2019, Sidney drove to M.S.'s college to pick her up for Christmas break. While in her dorm room, Sidney penetrated M.S. anally. M.S. was in a lot of pain and kept trying to pull away, but Sidney did not seem to care. When she actually pushed away from him, Sidney "got really angry.... He looked like he was full of rage, and he started choking [her] and pushed [her] against the bed and kind of wrestled [her] for a moment." At some point, Sidney let M.S. go, and she reported needing to use the bathroom. Once out of the room, M.S. sprinted down the hallway until she found someone-a resident advisor for the dorm (RA).

Both M.S. and the RA testified that when M.S. found him, she began repeatedly asking for help. They decided to walk to the security office on campus. During the walk, M.S. spoke to Jackie on the phone, telling her about the sexual abuse and how long it had been happening. According to M.S., Jackie convinced her not to make a report to the police and to just stay on the phone with her while riding back to Ankeny with Sidney. Jackie "promised [her] when [they] got back home, she would talk it out with [her] and figure something out, and if he did do these things to me, put him in jail." M.S. complied with Jackie's directive. But the sex acts continued after M.S. returned to the family home. Eventually, after Sidney begged for a number of days, and feeling Jackie did not believe her and doing so would help her be able to return to college, M.S. recanted to Jackie.

A few months later, while back at college and with encouragement from others, M.S. made a report to the local police, alleging that Sidney had been sexually abusing her for years. A couple of police officers traveled to Ankeny to speak with Sidney and execute a search warrant on the family home. Detective Troy Schneider, who was one of the officers, spoke with Sidney for several hours. About forty-five minutes of the recorded discussion was played for the jury. During that portion, Sidney admitted to having a sexual relationship with M.S., telling the detective he slept in M.S.'s room three or four nights each week. Sidney told the detective that he used the sexual acts to correct M.S.'s behavior or way of thinking.

While admitting there were times M.S. told him she did not want their relationship to include sex acts, Sidney described the sexual relationship as consensual and claimed M.S. thought of him as "her man." As part of the execution of the search warrant, the bedding from M.S.'s room was seized. Later testing identified Sidney's sperm on the bedding.

The jury found Sidney guilty of all five counts of third-degree sexual abuse, and he was later sentenced to five terms of incarceration, each lasting for a period of up to ten years, which the court ordered him to serve consecutively. Sidney appeals.

II. Discussion. A. Mistrial.

Sidney claims the district court abused its discretion when, on the second day of his trial, after the court learned he had been exposed to COVID-19 while being held in the local jail, it sua...