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.

Rickey v. State

Court of Appeals of Iowa

June 7, 2017

DAVID ROY RICKEY SR., Applicant-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF IOWA, Respondent-Appellee.

         Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.

         David Rickey Sr. appeals the district court's dismissal of his application for postconviction relief. AFFIRMED.

          Courtney T. Wilson of Hopkins & Huebner, P.C., Davenport, for appellant.

          Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Thomas J. Ogden, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

          Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.

          MULLINS, Judge.

         David Rickey Sr. appeals the district court's dismissal of his application for postconviction relief (PCR), following his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree. He argues his PCR counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to file a statement of disputed facts and a memorandum of authorities supporting his resistance to the State's motion to dismiss his PCR application. We affirm.

         I. Background Facts and Proceedings

         The specific facts and circumstances surrounding the abuse are set forth in our prior opinion on direct appeal and need not be restated herein. See State v. Rickey, No. 14-1206, 2015 WL 9450471, at *1-2 (Iowa Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2015). Our court affirmed Rickey's conviction, concluding trial counsel did not have a duty to object to the admission of evidence of prior bad acts and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Rickey's motion for a new trial or in sustaining the State's objection to replaying a recorded police interview of the victim on cross-examination of the victim. Id. at *4-6. Our court further determined the record was inadequate to review Rickey's claim that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the replaying of a controlled call during jury deliberations and preserved the issue for PCR. Id. at *4.

         On April 11, 2016, Rickey filed a pro se application for PCR. On April 26, Rickey's appointed PCR counsel filed an amended petition, asserting numerous claims of ineffective assistance of counsel as well as other various claims.

         On May 3, the State sent interrogatories to Rickey. Rickey responded by filing a pro se motion to dismiss the State's propounded interrogatories, arguing they were unduly broad and burdensome, and claiming he and his PCR counsel had had insufficient time to review the interrogatories and respond to them. PCR counsel filed a motion for extension of time, which the district court granted.

         On July 8, the State filed a motion for summary disposition of the matter pursuant to Iowa Code section 822.6 (2016). PCR counsel resisted the motion "in its entirety" and "request[ed] a trial on all of the merits of [Rickey's] claims and claims preserved by the appellate court." On July 18, the district court entered an order summarily dismissing Rickey's PCR application. Rickey appeals.

         II. Standard of Review

         We generally review PCR proceedings for correction of errors at law. Nguyen v. State, 878 N.W.2d 744, 750 (Iowa 2016). However, when an applicant raises constitutional claims, such as claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, we apply a de ...


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.