from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Heather L.
Lauber (probation revocation) and Robert B. Hanson (plea and
defendant appeals his conviction for being a felon in
possession of a firearm. AFFIRMED.
Harrington of Harrington Law LC, Urbandale, for appellant.
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kyle Hanson, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.
Rushing appeals his conviction for being a felon in
possession of a firearm. Rushing claims the district court
did not have the authority to place him at a residential
facility when deferring judgment or to revoke his probation
for rule violations. He also claims the court erred in
ordering him to pay the law-enforcement-initiative surcharge.
We find the court had the authority to place Rushing in the
residential facility as a condition of probation and to
revoke his probation. We find the surcharge, although not
applicable, was not assessed against Rushing, making his
claim without merit. We affirm.
Background Facts & Proceedings
December 2016, Rushing was charged with criminal gang
participation and being a felon in possession of a firearm.
On March 10, 2017, Rushing pleaded guilty to being a felon in
possession of a firearm, in violation of Iowa Code section
724.26 (2016), and the State dismissed the gang-participation
charge. The State and the presentence investigation report
preparer recommended imprisonment. At the sentencing hearing
in April, Rushing requested a deferred judgment. The court
deferred judgment and placed Rushing on probation under the
supervision of the department of correctional services (DCS).
Rushing was ordered to reside at a residential facility as a
condition of probation. The court also ordered Rushing to pay
restitution and submit a DNA sample, and assessed a
law-enforcement-initiative surcharge, if applicable.
summer, Rushing violated facility rules and incurred other
probation violations. Rushing's probation was continued
following a revocation hearing in September. Rushing then
incurred additional violations, stipulated to the violations,
and agreed to the revocation of his probation and deferred
judgment. In March 2018, the court revoked Rushing's
deferred judgment, adjudicated him guilty of being a felon in
possession of a firearm, and sentenced him to prison.
appeals, claiming the court did not have the authority to
order him to a residential facility when he had not been
convicted and the court erred in ordering Rushing to pay the
Standard of Review
challenges the legality of a condition of his probation. Our
review of a defendant's sentence is for correction of
errors at law. State v. Valin, 724 N.W.2d 440, 444
(Iowa 2006). "We may correct an illegal sentence at any
time." State v. Davis, 544 N.W.2d 453, 455
(Iowa 1996). "When a defendant challenges the terms of
probation, '[i]t has long been a well-settled rule that
trial courts have a broad discretion in probation matters
which will be interfered with only upon a finding of abuse of
that discretion.'" Valin, 724 N.W.2d at 444