Opinion
No. 1-1043 / 01-0439
Filed April 10, 2002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, John Bauercamper, Judge.
Terry Ashley appeals his judgment and sentence following entry of a guilty plea to lascivious acts with a child and dissemination of obscene materials to minors. SENTENCE VACATED, REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and Patricia Reynolds, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Cristen Odell, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee-State.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Terry Ashley pled guilty to seven counts of lascivious acts with a child and one count of dissemination of obscene materials to minors. See Iowa Code §§ 709.8(1); 728.2 (1999). The eight charges stemmed from allegations of misconduct with four children. The district court sentenced Ashley to terms not exceeding five years on the lascivious acts counts and one year on the eighth count. The court ordered various combinations of concurrent and consecutive sentences, resulting in a term of confinement not exceeding twenty years. On appeal, Ashley contends the court failed to articulate reasons for imposing the consecutive sentences. Our review of this issue is for abuse of discretion. State v. Oliver, 588 N.W.2d 412, 414 (Iowa 1998). After imposing the sentences described above, the court stated:
The Court deems the sentences appropriate in these cases, based upon the nature of the crimes, the facts and circumstances, and the Pre-Sentence Investigation. And the court does not believe that residential facility treatment in the Sex Offender Treatment Program would be appropriate.
The Court respects the defendant's continued protestation of his innocence. However, the Court does not believe that the Sex Offender Treatment Program would be successful with an individual who does not believe he did anything wrong, and that all of the testimony against him was false.
Although this statement came immediately after the court imposed the sentence and therefore could be construed as applying to the entire sentencing plan, including the imposition of consecutive sentences, we believe it is too general to apprise us of why consecutive rather than concurrent sentences were imposed. See Oliver, 588 N.W.2d at 414. Accord State v. Jacobs, 607 N.W.2d 679, 690
(Iowa 2000); State v. Uthe, 542 N.W.2d 810, 816 (Iowa 1996). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.
SENTENCE VACATED, REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.