from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Gregory D.
Brandt, District Associate Judge.
appeals his conviction for assault causing bodily injury.
C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Bradley M. Bender,
Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kelli A. Huser, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Bower, JJ.
Scarlett appeals his conviction for assault causing bodily
injury. We find there was no error in the court's summary
disposition of Scarlett's motion for new trial and the
court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. The
court improperly entered a no-contact order prohibiting
Scarlett from having contact with the victim for five years
from the date of resentencing. We find the court did not
abuse its discretion in sentencing Scarlett. We affirm his
conviction and sentence.
Background Facts & Proceedings
found Scarlett guilty of assault causing bodily injury after
he pulled the hair of his former girlfriend, M.H., slapped
her, made her walk around on her hands and knees in a parking
lot, and kicked her in the ribs. Scarlett filed a motion for
new trial, which was denied by the district court. He was
sentenced to a term not to exceed one year, with all but
forty-five days suspended, placed on probation for one year,
and ordered not to have contact with M.H. for five years. The
sentence was made consecutive to a conviction for operating
while intoxicated (OWI) in another case.
appealed his conviction for assault causing bodily injury. On
appeal, we found the district court (1) did not abuse its
discretion in concluding a master/slave contract was
admissible; (2) did not err in denying Scarlett's motion
for judgment of acquittal on the ground the State did not
present sufficient evidence to show M.H. suffered a bodily
injury; (3) used an improper standard in denying
Scarlett's motion for new trial; and (4) did not provide
reasons for making the sentence in this case consecutive to
the OWI sentence. State v. Scarlett, No. 14-1704,
2016 WL 1130039, at *3-6 (Iowa Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2016). We
remanded to the district court to apply the correct standard
in addressing Scarlett's motion for new trial and stated
if the court again denied the motion for new trial, then
Scarlett should be resentenced. Id. at * 5-6.
court stated on the record at the hearing on remand:
Well, after hearing the evidence in this particular case, the
Court does find that the jury verdict was supported by the
evidence presented in this trial as to each and every element
of the offense the defendant was convicted of.
Further, the weight of the evidence established the
defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to each of
those matters. There was - clearly, the verdict rendered by
the jury was not contrary to the law or evidence that was
presented at the time of trial, so the motion for new trial
resentencing, M.H. asked to have Scarlett sent to jail.
Defense counsel stated Scarlett had not been in trouble since
the original sentencing and had not had any contact with M.H.
The court noted defense counsel's statements but found,
"I don't know that it has truly changed
anything." The court sentenced Scarlett to one year in
jail, with all but forty-five days suspended, placed him on
probation for one year, and ordered him to complete a
batterer's education program. The court ordered Scarlett