Opinion
No. 3-081 / 01-1619.
Filed April 30, 2003.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cherokee County, FRANK B. NELSON, Judge.
Defendant appeals from judgment and sentence entered following his plea of guilty to harassment in the first degree. AFFIRMED.
Joseph Flannery, LeMars, and Blake Trapp, Aurelia, pro se, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Mary Tabor, Assistant Attorney General, and Mark Cozine, County Attorney, for appellee.
Heard by HUITINK, P.J., and HECHT, J., and HABHAB, S.J.
Senior Judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206(2003).
On May 30, 2001, Blake Trapp, during a phone conversation with the director of Health Promotion, Prevention and Addictive Behaviors, Janet Zwick, told her he was going to kill Judge Donovan Schaefer. Zwick reported Trapp's threat to the Cherokee County Sheriff's department. The Cherokee County Attorney filed a trial information charging Trapp with terrorism and harassment in the first degree. Trapp entered a written arraignment and plea of not guilty.
On September 6, 2001, pursuant to a plea agreement, Trapp filed a written guilty plea to harassment in the first degree, and the State dismissed the terrorism charge. Trapp also waived his right to file a motion in arrest of judgment. The district court accepted Trapp's plea of guilty and sentenced him to 365 days in jail and placed him on probation for one year.
Trapp filed a notice of appeal on September 24, 2001. In his appeal, Trapp challenges the factual basis supporting his plea of guilty to harassment in the first degree.
The State contends Trapp has not preserved error for his claim on appeal. The State argues that not only did Trapp fail to preserve error by not filing a motion in arrest of judgment, but that Trapp expressly waived his claim by filing a waiver of right to file an arrest of judgment. We agree. A defendant may not challenge his guilty plea on appeal unless his has filed a motion in arrest of judgment in the district court. Iowa R.Crim.P. 2.24(3)( a); State v. Miller, 590 N.W.2d 724, 725 (Iowa 1999). We also note that Trapp does not allege his trial counsel was ineffective for allowing him to enter a guilty plea for first-degree harassment or for failing to advise him not to waive his right to file a motion in arrest of judgment. Because Trapp provides no avenue by which we may disregard his explicit waiver of his right to challenge his plea and address the merits of his appeal, we affirm the district court's entry of judgment and sentence.
It should be noted that Trapp's counsel in this appeal did not represent Trapp in the district court proceedings.