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. Gonzalez

Court of Appeals of Iowa

November 21, 2018

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SAUL GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Becky Goettsch, District Associate Judge.

         Saul Gonzalez appeals following his plea of guilty to driving while barred as a habitual offender.

          Cami N. Eslick of Eslick Law, Indianola, for appellant.

          Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Thomas J. Ogden, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

          Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ.

          DANILSON, CHIEF JUDGE.

         Saul Gonzalez appeals the denial of his motion in arrest of judgment following his plea of guilty to driving while barred as a habitual offender. Because Gonzalez has not provided clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable fact finder could convict him of the offense to which he pled guilty, his claim of actual innocence fails. We affirm.

         On March 15, 2017, Gonzalez, represented by Tim McCarthy, entered a written plea of guilty to driving while barred. An order accepting the written plea agreement was entered on the same date.

         On April 19, Gonzalez filed a pro se motion in arrest of judgment, [1] asserting:

After revi[ew]ing the Iowa [department of transportation] DOT official driv[]ing record, the [Des Moines Police Department] DMPD incident report and Iowa courts online, it has come t[]o my attention that my records and that of these three entities are wrong it seems that they have me confused for another individual with my same name and I should not have even be[e]n barred at the time of incident. If I were to be incarcerated it would on false pretence. Will explain at hearing.

         On July 24, Gonzalez, now represented by Katharine Massier, filed a "withdrawal of motion in arrest of judgment/dismiss charges."

         On November 13, Gonzalez filed a pro se "motion to dismiss" in which he asserted a conflict of interest with his attorney and a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. He alleged he had not agreed to counsel's motion to withdraw the motion in arrest of judgment and that his due process rights had been violated.

         On December 4, 2017, the court appointed attorney Jonah Dyer to represent Gonzalez. On January 5, 2018, a hearing was held at ...


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.