from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D.
for postconviction relief appeals the district court denial
of his application.
Dunn of Parrish Kruidenier Dunn Boles Gribble Gentry Brown
& Bergmann LLP, Des Moines, for appellant.
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Genevieve Reinkoester,
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State.
Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.
Brown Jr. appeals the dismissal of his application for
postconviction relief (PCR). On appeal, he claims his counsel
provided ineffective assistance. We find Brown failed to
establish by a preponderance of evidence his counsel provided
ineffective assistance. We affirm the district court.
Background Facts & Proceedings
a series of three robberies in fall 2011, Brown was charged
with three counts of robbery in the second degree and two
counts of kidnapping in the third degree. In 2013, prior to
trial, Brown and the State reached an agreement where Brown
stipulated to being a habitual offender in exchange for the
State reducing the two felony counts of kidnapping in the
third degree to misdemeanor counts of false imprisonment.
Following a jury trial, Brown was convicted of two counts of
second-degree robbery and acquitted of the other three
charges. In State v. Brown, No. 13-0456, 2014 WL
2600221, at *3 (Iowa Ct. App. June 11, 2014), this court
addressed his claims of insufficient evidence and affirmed
his convictions. We will not restate the background facts, as
they are set out in our prior opinion. Brown, 2014
WL 2600221, at *1-2. The sentencing court ordered consecutive
sentences and applied a habitual-offender enhancement
increasing the mandatory minimum sentence.
filed a pro se application for PCR on November 30, 2014.
Counsel later supplemented the application on May 13, 2016.
The court denied the application on December 14, 2016.
appeal, Brown claims his trial counsel failed to provide
effective assistance in three ways: (1) advising Brown to try
the three robberies he was charged with in a single
proceeding; (2) failing to move to suppress pretrial photo
lineup identifications; and (3) failing to ensure the court
colloquy met the requirements for a voluntary and intelligent
guilty plea to the habitual offender enhancement.
Standard of Review
ordinarily review PCR proceedings for errors at law.
Lamasters v. State, 821 N.W.2d 856, 862 (Iowa 2012).
We review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel de
novo. Ledezma v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134, 141 (Iowa