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. Martin

Court of Appeals of Iowa

June 7, 2017

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MELVIN MARTIN JR., Defendant-Appellant.

         Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Kim M. Riley, District Associate Judge.

         A defendant appeals his conviction for domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury, third offense. AFFIRMED.

          Lanny M. Van Daele of Kennedy, Cruise, Frey & Gelner, L.L.P., Iowa City, for appellant.

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

          Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and McDonald, JJ.

          VOGEL, Presiding Judge.

         Melvin Martin Jr. appeals his conviction for third-offense domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury, in violation of Iowa Code sections 708.1, 708.2A(1), and 708.2A(4) (2015), following a stipulated trial on the minutes of evidence. Specifically, Martin claims the district court erred in limiting the factual record to the trial information and minutes of evidence and in denying his post-notice-of-appeal motion to modify the record. Because we find Martin stipulated to a trial on the minutes of evidence and find no error in the district court's denial of Martin's motion to modify the record, we affirm Martin's conviction.

         I. Background Facts and Proceedings

         On August 10, 2015, the State charged Martin with third-offense domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury. After waiving his right to a jury trial, Martin entered a plea of guilty on March 28, 2016. However, Martin later withdrew his guilty plea and agreed to a trial on the minutes of evidence as filed along with the trial information. The district court discussed Martin's request for a trial on the minutes of evidence with him:

THE COURT: All right. Thank you. So Mr. Martin, let me ask you a few questions about that. We were scheduled for a trial to the court today, which would be just a trial in front of a judge, as you had previously waived your right to a trial by jury. And if we proceed with a trial to the court, that would involve the State calling a number of witnesses to give testimony in this case. And then they would be, of course, questioned and cross-examined by your attorney as part of the submission of the case to the court. Mr. Smith informs me that you and he have talked, and that in lieu of proceeding with the trial to the court, you have made the decision to proceed by way of a Trial on the Minutes. Is that what you want to do today?
MR. MARTIN: Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT: Okay. And you understand that if you do proceed with a Trial on the Minutes, then the court would determine your guilt or innocence based solely on the Minutes of Testimony, that is the information contained in the police reports, witness statements, and the summaries of those statements that were filed along with the Trial Information. Do you understand that?
MR. MARTIN: Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT: Okay. And you agree that this is the evidence -the evidence in the Minutes of Testimony would be the evidence that the State would present today if the State were, in fact, ...

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.