From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Knowles

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Apr 13, 2005
698 N.W.2d 338 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-262 / 04-1131

Filed April 13, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Gregory A. Hulse and Darrell Goodhue, Judges.

Defendant appeals the judgment and sentence entered following his convictions for manufacture of less than five grams of methamphetamine and third-degree burglary. AFFIRMED.

Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and James G. Tomka, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Linda Hines, Assistant Attorney General, Wayne Reisetter, County Attorney, and Jeannine Gilmore, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vogel and Miller, JJ.


Brian Knowles appeals the judgment and sentence entered following his convictions for manufacture of less than five grams of methamphetamine and third-degree burglary. He contends the district court's sentence was "unreasonable and illegal." We review his claim for an abuse of discretion. State v. Boltz, 542 N.W.2d 9, 10 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995).

In January 2004, Knowles was charged with manufacture of methamphetamine, conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine, possession with intent to deliver methamphetamine, and third-degree burglary. Knowles initially pled not guilty and, upon his request, the court transferred him from jail to an inpatient substance abuse treatment program. His treatment was not successful, although he demonstrated some progress late in the program.

In April 2004, Knowles pled guilty to manufacture of less than five grams of methamphetamine and third-degree burglary. He requested he be sentenced to probation along with inpatient substance abuse treatment. The district court followed the State's recommendation and sentenced Knowles to ten years imprisonment on the manufacturing conviction and five years imprisonment on the burglary conviction. The sentences are to be served concurrently.

It is the court's duty to consider all available sentencing options, give consideration to the circumstances of the case, and to exercise the sentencing option which will best accomplish justice for society and for the defendant. State v. Mai, 572 N.W.2d 168, 170 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997). Factors to be considered by the court include the nature of the offense and attending circumstances, as well as the defendant's age, character, propensities, and chances of reform. Boltz, 542 N.W.2d at 10.

We conclude the district court properly sentenced Knowles. In denying Knowles' request for probation and drug treatment, the court cited his previous failed attempt at a similar inpatient drug treatment program, the seriousness of his drug problem, Knowles ability to receive effective drug treatment in prison, and his ability to be rehabilitated. The district court considered the circumstances of this case, including the arguments asserted by Knowles, and chose an appropriate sentence. The sentence is not illegal nor do we find it to be an abuse of the district court's discretion. Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

State v. Knowles

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Apr 13, 2005
698 N.W.2d 338 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

State v. Knowles

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, v. BRIAN DALE KNOWLES, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Apr 13, 2005

Citations

698 N.W.2d 338 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)