State v. Thorne
Citation | 888 N.W.2d 903 (Table) |
Decision Date | 26 October 2016 |
Docket Number | No. 16–0355.,16–0355. |
Parties | STATE of Iowa, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. James L. THORNE, Defendant–Appellant. |
Court | Court of Appeals of Iowa |
John J. Sullivan of Sullivan Law Office, P.C., Oelwein, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kyle P. Hanson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by DANILSON, C.J., and MULLINS and BOWER, JJ.
James Thorne appeals his convictions for three counts of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse. We conclude Thorne has not shown he received ineffective assistance because defense counsel permitted him to enter an Alford plea to three counts of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse.1 Thorne's second claim, that his plea was not knowing and voluntary, must be preserved for possible postconviction proceedings. We affirm Thorne's convictions.
On December 19, 2014, officers were executing a search warrant at the home of Thorne on a different matter when they observed a fifteen-year-old girl come out of the bedroom. Thorne was then twenty years old. An examination of Thorne's cell phone showed text messages of a sexual nature between Thorne and the girl. When questioned, both Thorne and the girl stated they had been engaged in a sexual relationship.
Thorne was charged with four counts of sexual abuse in the third degree, a class "C" felony. Thorne signed a written plea agreement in which he agreed to enter Alford pleas to three reduced charges of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse, in violation of Iowa Code section 709.11(3) (2013), an aggravated misdemeanor. The plea agreement also provided Thorne would be sentenced to two years in prison on each count, to be served consecutively, the sentences would be suspended, and Thorne would be placed on probation. In addition, Thorne would be given a special sentence for ten years, pursuant to section 903B.2, and would be required to register as a sex offender.
The court accepted Thorne's written plea and sentenced him in accordance with the plea agreement. The fourth charge against Thorne was dismissed without prejudice. Thorne now appeals his convictions, claiming he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
We review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo. Ennenga v. State, 812 N.W.2d 696, 701 (Iowa 2012). To establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show (1) the attorney failed to perform an essential duty and (2) prejudice resulted to the extent it denied the defendant a fair trial. State v. Carroll, 767 N.W.2d 638, 641 (Iowa 2009). A defendant has the burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence counsel was ineffective. State v. McKettrick, 480 N.W.2d 52, 55 (Iowa 1992).
Thorne claims he received ineffective assistance because defense counsel permitted him to enter an Alford plea to three counts of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse when there was not a sufficient factual basis for the plea. The offense of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse requires evidence of an assault, as defined in section 708.1. Iowa Code § 709.11. Thorne claims there was no evidence of an assault because he was involved in a consensual sexual relationship.
"It is a responsibility of defense counsel to ensure that a client does not plead guilty to a charge for which there is no objective factual basis." State v. Finney, 832 N.W.2d 46, 54 (Iowa 2013). "It follows that no advice to plead guilty would be considered competent absent a showing of a factual basis to support the crimes to which the accused has elected to plead guilty." Id. at 54–55. This requirement exists where a defendant has entered a guilty plea. State v. Schminkey, 597 N.W.2d 785, 788 (Iowa 1999). "On a claim that a plea bargain is invalid because of a lack of accuracy on the factual-basis issue, the entire record before the district court may be examined." Finney, 832 N.W.2d at 62.
In State v. Anderson, 222 N.W.2d 494, 495 (Iowa 1974), the Iowa Supreme Court stated:
Preliminarily, we note that under our decisions, as under the decisions generally,
(Citation omitted.) See also State v. Coil, 264 N.W.2d 293, 294 (Iowa 1978) ().
In the present case, the victim could not consent because she was fifteen years old and Thorne was more than four years older. See Iowa Code § 709.4(1)(b)(3)(d) ( ). The victim's purported consent to a sexual relationship with Thorne does not preclude a finding he...
To continue reading
Request your trial