from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, Paul B.
Ahlers, District Associate Judge.
appellant appeals his guilty plea and sentence, asserting his
trial counsel was ineffective and the sentencing court abused
its discretion. AFFIRMED.
Kimberly A. Voss-Orr of Law Office of Kimberly A. Voss-Orr,
Ames, for appellant.
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kelli Huser, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Bower, J., and Blane, S.J.
Joseph Hauersperger appeals his guilty plea and sentence
claiming: (1) his trial attorney was ineffective in failing
to object to the county attorney's breach of the plea
agreement, and (2) the trial court abused its discretion in
imposing sentence. After reviewing the record, we find trial
counsel was not ineffective and the sentencing court did not
abuse its discretion; we affirm.
March 27, 2015, Hauersperger was charged by trial information
with driving while barred in violation of Iowa Code section
321.256 (2015). In August, Hauersperger, while represented by
counsel, signed and filed a written guilty plea to the
charge. The guilty plea contained the plea
agreement, which was filed of record. The agreement provided
Hauersperger would plead guilty as charged and the county
attorney would recommend to the court at sentencing a
one-year sentence with all but ninety days suspended, two
years' probation, the statutory minimum fine, and
dismissal of an unrelated charge and any other charges
related to this matter. Hauersperger could request a lesser
jail term and the ability to make payments towards fines and
fees. By order on August 25, 2015, the court accepted the
guilty plea and set sentencing.
later date, Hauersperger appeared with his counsel before the
court for sentencing. The court inquired as to the plea
agreement and the prosecutor set it forth exactly as
contained in Hauersperger's written guilty plea, without
extraneous comment, and also described Hauersperger's
criminal record.Hauersperger's trial counsel did not
lodge an objection to the State's recitation of the
agreement. Hauersperger's attorney then presented his own
sentencing recommendation, which was for one year in jail
with all but twelve days suspended and credit for time
served-meaning Hauersperger would spend no further time in
custody, as he had already served twelve days.
court then allowed Hauersperger to exercise his right of
allocution. Following Hauersperger's statement, the court
imposed sentence, rejecting the plea agreement and sentencing
him to two years of imprisonment. The court stated on the
record the reasons for imposing the prison sentence.
Following sentencing, Hauersperger filed this timely appeal.
II. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.
Standard of Review.
claims are reviewed de novo as they involve a constitutional
issue of the right to effective counsel. State ...