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. Sams

Court of Appeals of Iowa

May 3, 2017

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
AARON LANCE SAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

         Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Randy S. DeGeest, Judge.

         The defendant challenges his conviction for operating while intoxicated, second offense. AFFIRMED.

          Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Maria L. Ruhtenberg, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

          Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

          Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and Tabor, JJ.

          POTTERFIELD, Presiding Judge.

         Aaron Sams appeals from his conviction for operating while intoxicated, second offense. Sams maintains he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel. Specifically, he maintains counsel was ineffective for failing to make a motion for judgment of acquittal specifically challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's finding that Sams was under the influence of alcohol when he was stopped in his vehicle by a police officer.

         To succeed on a claim of ineffective assistance, Sams has the burden to establish "by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) trial counsel failed to perform an essential duty, and (2) this failure resulted in prejudice." State v. Williams, 695 N.W.2d 23, 29 (Iowa 2005). Here, the record is adequate to address the claim on direct appeal. See State v. Truesdell, 679 N.W.2d 611, 616 (Iowa 2004) ("Clearly, if the record in this case fails to reveal substantial evidence to support the conviction[], counsel was ineffective for failing to properly raise the issue and prejudice resulted. On the other hand, if the record reveals substantial evidence, counsel's failure to raise the claim of error could not be prejudicial. Consequently, the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in this case can and should be addressed on direct appeal."). Our review is de novo. Id. at 615.

         There is no dispute that Sams was operating a vehicle when he was stopped by a police officer; Sams was initially stopped for driving thirty-five miles per hour in a speed zone that allowed only twenty-five miles per hour. The issue for the jury was whether Sams was under the influence while doing so. The jury was instructed as follows:

A person is "under the influence" when, by drinking liquor and/or beer, one or more of the following is true:
1. His reason or mental ability has been affected.
2. His judgment is impaired.
3. His emotions are visibly excited.
4. He has, to any extent, lost control of bodily actions or ...

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.