from the Iowa District Court for Hamilton County, Paul B.
Ahlers, District Associate Judge.
defendant appeals the sentence imposed upon his pleas of
A. Macro Jr. of Macro & Kozlowski, LLP, West Des Moines,
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Thomas J. Ogden, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and McDonald, JJ.
Goodwin III appeals the sentence imposed upon his pleas of
guilty to possession of methamphetamine, second offense, and
eluding, in violation of Iowa Code sections 124.401(5) and
321.279(2) (2016), both aggravated misdemeanors. The plea
agreement called for the State to dismiss other pending
charges and to make a sentencing recommendation of a two-year
suspended sentence on each conviction, to run concurrently,
with credit for time served and two years' probation
along with the applicable minimum fines, surcharges, and
court costs. The pleas were not conditioned on the
accepting the guilty pleas, the court ordered the preparation
of a presentence investigation (PSI) report, which
recommended probation with placement in a residential
correctional facility and mental-health and substance-abuse
treatment. At sentencing, the court rejected the recommended
sentence under the plea agreement and the PSI, and instead it
imposed a two-year term of incarceration on each conviction,
with the sentences to run consecutively to each other and
consecutive to the sentence for an offense committed in
another county, along with the minimum fines, surcharges, and
appeals claiming the court abused its discretion in not
ordering probation in accordance with the plea agreement and
the recommendation of the PSI, and also for running the
sentences consecutively in light of the fact the eluding and
possession of methamphetamine occurred at the same time.
decision of the district court to impose a particular
sentence within the statutory limits is cloaked with a strong
presumption in its favor, and will only be overturned for an
abuse of discretion or the consideration of inappropriate
matters." State v. Formaro, 638 N.W.2d 720, 724
(Iowa 2002). An abuse of discretion occurs only when
"the decision was exercised on grounds or for reasons
that were clearly untenable or unreasonable."
When imposing the sentence, the district court stated:
Mr. Goodwin, my goals with respect to sentencing are to
provide for your rehabilitation and protection of the
community. In trying to achieve those goals, to the extent
these details have been made known to me, I have taken into
account the recommendations of the parties, your age, your
employment history and circumstances and goals, your
educational background, your family circumstances and
obligations, your ridiculous criminal history, your
appearance and demeanor here in the courtroom, your substance
abuse issues and needs, your mental health issues and needs,
the nature of the offense and facts and circumstances
surrounding it, and the other information presented here
today in this hearing, as well as in the Presentence
. . . .
. . . The reasons for consecutive sentences are ...