From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Versluis

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Oct 26, 2005
707 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-759 / 05-0065

Filed October 26, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Patrick M. Carr and Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judges.

Kenneth Versluis appeals from a judgment and sentence following his convictions for failure to affix a tax stamp and possession with intent to deliver five grams or less of methamphetamine. AFFIRMED.

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

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Richard J. Bennett, Assistant Attorney General, Michael J. Houchins, County Attorney, and Michael L. Zenor, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Vogel and Eisenhauer, JJ.


Kenneth Versluis appeals from a judgment and sentence following his convictions for failure to affix a tax stamp in violation of Iowa Code section 453B.12 (2001) and possession with intent to deliver five grams or less of methamphetamine in violation of section 124.401(1)(c)(6). He contends the district court erred in denying his motions to dismiss based upon the State's failure to comply with the one-year speedy trial right. In deciding indictment and speedy trial questions our scope of review is for correction of errors at law. See State v. Miller, 637 N.W.2d 201, 204 (Iowa 2001). Because a district court has discretion to avoid dismissal under Iowa's speedy trial rule, we ultimately look to whether the district court abused its discretion. Id.

Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(2)( c) provides that all criminal cases must be brought to trial within one year after the defendant's initial arraignment unless an extension is granted by the court for good cause. Under our rule, good cause focuses on only one factor, the reason for the delay. State v. Nelson, 600 N.W.2d 598, 601 (Iowa 1999). Delay attributable to a defendant may constitute good cause when it prevents the State from carrying out its obligations to bring him to trial. State v. Keys, 535 N.W.2d 783, 787 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995). A defendant may not actively or passively participate in the events that delay his or her trial and then later take advantage of that delay to terminate the prosecution. State v. Ruiz, 496 N.W.2d 789, 792 (Iowa Ct.App. 1992).

There is no dispute trial on the charges at issue did not occur within one year of the initial arraignment; trial for the tax stamp violation occurred one year, eight months, and eighteen days after the initial arraignment and trial on the intent to deliver charge occurred one year and five months after the initial arraignment. However, Versluis agreed to or jointly requested the continuances that delayed trial past the one-year mark. Both the State and Versluis anticipated a federal prosecution on drug charges which might lead to a dismissal of these charges. Accordingly, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motions for dismissal.

Versluis brings identical claims under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Our courts have consistently ruled that rule 2.33(2) is more stringent than its constitutional counterpart recognized in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S. Ct. 2182, 33 L. Ed. 2d 101 (1972). Miller, 637 N.W.2d at 204; Nelson, 600 N.W.2d at 601. Because Versluis's claims fail under rule 2.33(2), his constitutional claims must also fail.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

State v. Versluis

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Oct 26, 2005
707 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

State v. Versluis

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KENNETH FRANK VERSLUIS…

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Oct 26, 2005

Citations

707 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Citing Cases

State v. Herrmann

Babb's Inc. v. Babb, 169 N.W.2d 211, 213 (Iowa 1969). In attempting to meet its heavy burden of proving…