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.

Brodene v. State

Court of Appeals of Iowa

September 13, 2017

RAYMOND LEE BRODENE, Applicant-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF IOWA, Respondent-Appellee.

         Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.

         Applicant appeals the district court's decision denying his application for postconviction relief on the ground it was untimely.

          Christine E. Branstad of Branstad Law, P.L.L.C., Des Moines, for appellant.

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

          Considered by Vogel, P.J., Potterfield, J., and Goodhue, S.J. [*]

          GOODHUE, SENIOR JUDGE.

         Raymond Lee Brodene's sixth application for postconviction relief (PCR) was dismissed pursuant to the State's motion for summary disposition. Brodene appeals. We affirm.

         I. Factual and Procedural Background

         Brodene was convicted of first-degree murder in 1990. Brodene appealed, and the conviction was affirmed. State v. Brodene (Brodene I), 493 N.W.2d 793, 798 (Iowa 1992). Brodene has filed five previous requests for PCR. Each has been denied, but the fourth PCR action was appealed and is most relevant to the current one. See Brodene v. State (Brodene III), No. 11-0837, 2012 WL 5356036 (Iowa Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2012). The facts concerning the underlying crime are set out in the two appellate cases cited and need not be repeated here. Suffice it to say that in Brodene I, our supreme court said that although impeachment testimony offered by Brodene was erroneously denied, it was considered a harmless error because "other clear evidence overwhelmingly established Brodene's guilt." 493 N.W.2d at 797. This sixth PCR filed by Brodene was dismissed on the State's motion for summary judgment.

         II. Error Preservation

         The State does not contest error preservation.

         III.Standard of Review

         The trial court sustained the motion for summary judgment on the basis there was no material factual dispute. The undisputed facts reveal the three-year statute of limitations applicable to PCR actions had run. In addition, the "all inclusive grounds" requirement applicable to PCR proceedings makes all subsequent PCR actions problematic, and the application of res judicata as a bar to any issue previously resolved further limits any claim Brodene can make. See Iowa Code §§ 822.3, .8 (2015). The interpretation of the applicable statutory provisions relating to PCR is for errors of law. Kane v. State, 436 N.W.2d 624, 626 (Iowa 1989).

         IV. ...


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.