Opinion
No. 3-404 / 02-1514
Filed August 27, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Thomas M. Horan, Judge.
Robert E. DeWitt, Jr. appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress resulting in his conviction of forgery and theft in the third degree. AFFIRMED.
Bruce Goddard, Iowa City, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Darrel Mullins, Assistant Attorney General, J. Patrick White, County Attorney, and Michael D. Brennan, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Huitink and Vogel, JJ.
Robert E. DeWitt, Jr. (DeWitt) appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress resulting in his conviction of forgery in violation of Iowa Code sections 715A.2(1)(a)(b) or (d), 715A.2(2)(a)(3) and/or 703.1 (2001), and theft in the third degree in violation of Iowa Code sections 714.1(4) and 714.2(3) (2001). We affirm.
On February 24, 2002, officers of the Coralville Police Department responded to a call reporting an assault involving a gun at the Ramada Inn in Coralville, Iowa. A witness directed officers to the rooms occupied by DeWitt and five members of his family. In the course of their investigation, officers made a warrantless seizure of several forged identification cards, receipts, and bags of toys from DeWitt's rooms. As a result, DeWitt was charged with the foregoing offenses.
DeWitt moved to suppress the evidence seized. The trial court's ruling denying DeWitt's motion to suppress provides in part:
that the State has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the searches and seizures of the Defendants and their motel rooms in this case were made: 1. As an incident to lawful arrest; 2. Pursuant to Defendant Robert DeWitt, Sr.'s verbal and written consents; and 3. Because of the presence of probable cause and exigent circumstances.
DeWitt agreed to a trial on the minutes of testimony attached to the trial information. The trial court found DeWitt guilty and entered judgment and sentence accordingly.
On appeal DeWitt raises the following issues:
(1) The police conducted an illegal cursory safety check of the premises.
(2) The Reverend DeWitt did not consent to the search.
(3) The written consent signed by the Reverend DeWitt was not voluntary.
(4) The court erred in concluding that the search was a search incident to arrest.
Although DeWitt raises four constitutional challenges to the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress, he fails to challenge the court's finding of probable cause and exigent circumstances supporting the warrantless search. "Failure in the brief to state, to argue or to cite authority in support of an issue may be deemed waiver of that issue." Iowa R.App.P. 6.14(1)( c); see also State v. Stoen, 596 N.W.2d 504, 507 (Iowa 1999) (quoting Inghram v. Dairyland Mut. Ins. Co., 215 N.W.2d 239, 240 (Iowa 1974)) ("where a party's failure to comply with the appellate rules requires the court `to assume a partisan role and undertake the [party's] research and advocacy'"). Because DeWitt has waived any resulting error attending the trial court's finding that the warrantless search was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances, we are compelled to affirm.