EDWARD A. CAMPBELL, Applicant-Appellant,
STATE OF IOWA, Respondent-Appellee.
from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P.
postconviction-relief applicant appeals the district
court's denial of his postconviction-relief application.
M. Phelps, Hudson, Florida, for appellant.
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Linda J. Hines, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee State.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Mullins, J., and Blane,
Campbell appeals from the district court denial of his
application for postconviction relief (PCR), in which he
represented himself. On appeal, Campbell, now represented by
counsel, contends that the district court erred in its
wholesale dismissal of Campbell's pretrial motions,
finding that trial and appellate counsel were not
ineffective, and finding that sufficient evidence was
presented to convict Campbell. Campbell raises additional
issues in a pro se brief.
review, we find no error or ineffective assistance and
Factual and Procedural Background.
court addressed Campbell's case on direct appeal,
succinctly stating the underlying facts:
Edward Campbell came to the apartment of acquaintance Durrell
Parks, who was watching a movie with his uncle, Atrice
Chaptman. Campbell opened the door, entered without
Parks' permission, and hit Parks. Chaptman heard the
commotion and "football-tackled" and
"body-slammed" Campbell, who he had known for
several years. Chaptman eventually released Campbell, and
Minutes later, Chaptman saw Campbell breaking the windows of
his vehicle with "some bricks or something."
Chaptman called 911. State v. Campbell, No. 16-0550,
2017 WL 2464070, at *1 (Iowa Ct. App. June 7, 2017). Parks
was treated for injuries from the scuffle at a hospital.
Chaptman and Parks eventually identified Campbell in a
photographic lineup. Partway through his jury trial, Campbell
dismissed his attorney. Trial counsel remained as standby
counsel. Ultimately, the jury convicted Campbell of
first-degree burglary, second-degree criminal mischief, and
assault causing bodily injury. The court sentenced him to
twenty-five years imprisonment. On direct appeal, our court
affirmed. Id. at *10.
then filed a pro se application for PCR. The district court
originally appointed an attorney to represent Campbell in the
PCR action but cancelled the appointment at Campbell's
request. In the pretrial phrase, Campbell submitted more than
eighty filings to the court. The court ruled on some,
directed Campbell to consolidate the others, and required
Campbell to obtain a pretrial hearing date from court
administration. Campbell did not comply with this order.
Rather, his filings requested the clerk of court and court
administrator take care of the court's order. The court
held a final pretrial conference where Campbell could not
argue his motions because he did not retain copies. At
commencement of the PCR trial, the court inquired what
pretrial motions required the court's attention, and
Campbell-unable to recall the substance of any
motion-responded, "All of them." The court then
stated that it had reviewed all remaining pending motions and
denied them. Campbell produced no witnesses at trial, but he
stated he wanted to testify and was sworn under oath. He then
made a lengthy statement on his issues. The State's only
witness was Campbell's criminal trial attorney.
district court denied Campbell's PCR application on all
the raised grounds. Campbell appeals.
Standard of Review.
generally review the denial of an application for [PCR] for
correction of errors at law." Sauser v. State,
928 N.W.2d 816, 818 (Iowa 2019). "However, our review is
de novo when the basis for [PCR] implicates a constitutional
violation." Linn v. State, 929 N.W.2d 717, 729
(Iowa 2019). "PCR applications alleging ineffective
assistance of counsel raise a constitutional claim."