from the Iowa District Court for Pocahontas County, Gary L.
Gleason appeals from his conviction for eluding. AFFIRMED.
W. Bjornstad of Bjornstad Law Office, Spirit Lake, for
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kyle Hanson, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Danilson, C.J., Doyle, J., and Mahan, S.J.
Gleason appeals from his conviction for eluding,
in violation of Iowa Code section 321.279(1) (2013),
contending there is insufficient evidence to support the
conviction, and that trial counsel was ineffective in failing
to secure an expert witness to review the patrol car audio
recording of the incident. In a separate pro se brief, in
addition to the ineffective-assistance claim, Gleason alleges
the deputy falsely testified he activated his siren, the
audio of the patrol car recording had been altered to insert
siren sounds, and the prosecutor withheld that evidence.
of the evidence challenges are reviewed for correction of
errors at law." State v. Hearn, 797 N.W.2d 577,
579 (Iowa 2011).
driver commits eluding when he "willfully fails to bring
the motor vehicle to a stop or otherwise eludes or attempts
to elude a marked official law enforcement vehicle driven by
a uniformed peace officer after being given a visual and
audible signal to stop." Iowa Code § 321.279(1).
the evidence in the light most favorable to the State,
see Hearn, 797 N.W.2d at 580, we conclude there is
substantial evidence supporting the conviction. Gleason
himself testified he saw the deputy's vehicle behind him
for several minutes and its lights were activated. He also
acknowledged the vehicle was marked and the deputy was in
uniform. In Gleason's own audio recording, he muses aloud
the deputy might want him to pull over; nonetheless, he kept
driving. Gleason denied hearing the deputy's siren.
However, the deputy testified he had manually activated the
siren, which is heard on the audio recording from the
deputy's vehicle. Defense counsel questioned the deputy
about why the siren indicator of the vehicle recording was
not on, and the deputy explained the indicator showed when
the siren was activated automatically but not when activated
manually. The question was thus one of fact, which is in the
sole province of the jury. See State v. Williams,
315 N.W.2d 45, 58 (Iowa 1982) (noting the credibility of
witnesses and weight to be given their testimony is sole
province of jury). The jury was not required to accept the
defendant's version of the facts. State v.
Trammell, 458 N.W.2d 862, 863 (Iowa Ct. App. 1990).
Because there is substantial evidence from which a jury could
find Gleason willfully failed to stop his vehicle in response
to the deputy's flashing lights and siren, we affirm the
not address Gleason's pro se claims or the claims of
ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel,
of which are best left for possible postconviction
proceedings. We therefore affirm.