Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Gronstal

Court of Appeals of Iowa

February 19, 2014

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JASON DEVEREUS GRONSTAL, Defendant-Appellant

Editorial Note:

This opinion is subject to modification or correction by the court and is not final until the time for rehearing or further review has passed.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Stephen C. Gerard II, District Associate Judge. A defendant appeals his sentence claiming the district court considered improper factors.

Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Vidhya K. Reddy, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Sheryl Soich, Assistant Attorney General, Janet M. Lyness, County Attorney, and Anne M. Lahey, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Mullins, JJ.

OPINION

MULLINS, J.

Jason Gronstal appeals the sentence he received following his conviction for indecent exposure. He claims the district court improperly considered the department of corrections time calculation and parole policies in fashioning the sentence. In sentencing Gronstal to one year in jail to be served consecutively to the sentence he was currently serving, the district court stated, in part:

Based upon your criminal history, the nature of this offense, the need to present a deterrent to others similarly situated who might be inclined to commit offenses while they are in the custody of the department because they think it won't cause any additional inconvenience to them, I believe that the maximum sentence should be imposed.
I don't know exactly what is going to happen, but I have a pretty good understanding that imposing this sentence does not mean you are going to be in prison for one year after you are done with your immediate sentence .
There are many different things under the way that the Department of Corrections determines good time, earned time, work credits and the way consecutive sentences are considered that I believe will not impair your ability to be paroled at the time you earn that opportunity .
It will be the judgment of the Court that the Defendant be imprisoned for an additional one year period.
This sentence shall be consecutive with the sentence being ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.