from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K.
defendant appeals the sentence imposed following his
resentencing hearing. AFFIRMED.
M. Carr of Carr & Wright, P.L.C., Des Moines, for
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Genevieve Reinkoester,
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.
Calaway appeals following his second resentencing hearing. He
asserts the court abused its discretion in imposing
consecutive sentences and in denying his request for the
appointment of an expert at state expense to testify in
mitigation of punishment. We affirm the district court's
Background Facts and Proceedings.
January 1999, Calaway was convicted of first-degree murder
and first-degree kidnapping related to the 1996 death of
Dawue Stigler. See State v. Calaway, No. 99-0258,
2000 WL 278711, at *1 (Iowa Ct. App. Mar. 15, 2000). At the
time of the crime, Calaway was seventeen years old. Calaway
was originally sentenced to two consecutive life terms of
imprisonment without the possibility of parole. See
Calaway v. State, No. 07-072, 2008 WL 5412262, at *1
(Iowa Ct. App. Dec. 31, 2008).
the United States Supreme Court's decision in Miller
v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 489 (2012), which declared the
mandatory imposition of life without parole for juvenile
offenders violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of
cruel and unusual punishment, Iowa's Governor commuted
the sentences of all juvenile offenders who had received a
mandatory-life-without-parole sentence for a homicide offense
to life with no possibility of parole for sixty years. In
September 2012, Calaway filed a motion to correct an illegal
sentence arguing his original sentence and the commuted
sentence were unconstitutional. The district court stayed the
proceedings on Calaway's motion while our supreme court
addressed identical issues in pending cases. See State v.
Ragland, 836 N.W.2d 107, 122 (Iowa 2013) (declaring the
Governor's commutation did not correct the illegal
sentence under Miller and juvenile offenders must
still be given an individualized sentencing hearing).
October 2015, Calaway filed an application to retain an
expert witness at state expense for his resentencing hearing.
He asserted the expert would provide testimony regarding his
home life and background when he was a juvenile, and his
capacity for change in adulthood. He estimated the expert
would cost approximately $15, 000. The district court denied
the motion, saying: "In this case, defendant does not
need an expert witness to testify regarding his home life and
background and capacity for change." The court noted the
supreme court had already adopted standards through recent
case law for the district court to apply when resentencing
[t]he standards already incorporate the concepts that could
serve as the basis of any expert testimony. . . . The
concepts underlying the proposed expert testimony in this
case are inherently included within the standards that have
been carefully laid out by the United States and the Iowa
Supreme Courts in their recent decisions. There is no need to
hire an expert at public expense to testify to the concepts
that have already been adopted by case law.
court also noted that no presentence investigation (PSI)
report had been prepared in this case due to the prior
sentence of life without the possibility of parole. The court
ordered a PSI to be prepared and contain information
regarding Calaway's family, education, criminal history,
and other relevant factors to be considered. It also ordered
the department of corrections (DOC) to expand its existing
report to include additional information regarding
Calaway's successes and failures while incarcerated. In
the event the PSI could not be timely completed or if the DOC
report was insufficient, the court authorized Calaway to
retain an investigator to provide the necessary factual
information and approved the investigator's expense up to
before the March 2016 resentencing hearing, Calaway asked the
district court to reconsider its ruling denying his expert
after reviewing the PSI and the DOC's report, but at the