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. Goldensoph

Court of Appeals of Iowa

September 12, 2018

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TRISHA MARIE GOLDENSOPH, Defendant-Appellant.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Timothy J. Finn, Judge.

         Trisha Goldensoph appeals following her convictions of one count of delivery of methamphetamine and one count of possession of methamphetamine.

          Christopher A. Clausen of Clausen Law Office, Ames, for appellant.

          Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kelli A. Huser, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

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

          VAITHESWARAN, PRESIDING JUDGE.

         The Iowa State University Police Department used a confidential informant to make two controlled buys of methamphetamine. The State charged Trisha Marie Goldensoph with crimes arising from these transactions. A jury found her guilty of delivery of methamphetamine and possession of methamphetamine. See Iowa Code §§ 124.401 (1)(c)(6); 124.401(4); 124.413 (2015). Goldensoph moved for a new trial. The district court denied the motion.

         On appeal, Goldensoph challenges (1) the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury's findings of guilt and (2) the district court's denial of her motion for new trial premised on an allegation that "three jurors" were "sleeping" during trial.

         I. Sufficiency of the Evidence

         The jury was instructed the State would have to prove the following elements of delivery of methamphetamine:

1. On or about the 2nd day of November, 2015, the defendant delivered methamphetamine.
2. The defendant knew that the substance she delivered was methamphetamine.

         The jury was also instructed the State would have to prove the following elements of possession of methamphetamine:

1. On or about the 2nd day of November, 2015, the defendant knowingly or intentionally possessed methamphetamine or aided and abetted ...

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.