Opinion
No. 6-088 / 05-0886
Filed March 15, 2006
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Thomas R. Hronek, District Associate Judge.
Defendant appeals the sentence imposed by the district court on his conviction for indecent exposure. AFFIRMED.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and Robert P. Ranschau, Assistant Appellate Defender for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Ann E. Brenden, Assistant Attorney General, Stephen Holmes, County Attorney, and Mary Howell Sirna, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Hecht, J., and Beeghly, S.J.
Senior Judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2005).
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Yi Zhang was a graduate student in statistics at Iowa State University. Zhang is a native of China. During the fall semester of 2004, Nikki, a graduate student in the Masters of Business Administration program, hired Zhang as a tutor for a statistics class. They met six or seven times without problem, although Nikki noticed Zhang would rearrange his male parts more often than other males.
On November 27, 2004, Zhang came to Nikki's apartment for a tutoring session. They sat side by side on bar stools at a counter in Nikki's kitchen. After a while, Nikki noticed that Zhang was rubbing the crotch of his pants. When he failed to stop after a few minutes, she looked over, and saw that he had his penis out of his pants and he was masturbating.
Nikki became very distraught. She ran to her bedroom and locked the door. She then realized she did not have a telephone to call for help, so she ran back out and got her cell phone from the kitchen. She went back to the bedroom and locked her door. Nikki called her boyfriend, Wesley, and asked him to come over. She then called her mother, and at her recommendation called the police. When Wesley arrived, Zhang was standing in Nikki's apartment. Wesley demanded that Zhang leave. Police officers stopped Zhang was he was leaving the apartment parking lot.
Zhang was charged with indecent exposure, in violation of Iowa Code section 709.9 (2003). Zhang testified and denied doing anything inappropriate of a sexual nature. The jury returned a guilty verdict. The district court denied Zhang's motion for a new trial. Zhang was sentenced to one year in the county jail, with all but seven days suspended. On the suspended portion of his sentence he was placed on probation. Zhang was ordered to have a sex offender evaluation and was required to register as a sex offender. Zhang appeals his sentence.
II. Standard of Review
We review sentencing challenges for errors at law. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; State v. Liddell, 672 N.W.2d 805, 815 (Iowa 2003). A sentence will not be reversed unless there has been an abuse of discretion or a defect in the sentencing procedure. State v. Formaro, 638 N.W.2d 720, 724 (Iowa 2002). An abuse of discretion is found when the court exercises its discretion on grounds clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable. State v. Evans, 672 N.W.2d 328, 331 (Iowa 2003).
III. Merits
Zhang contends that the district court abused its discretion by not granting him a deferred judgment. At the sentencing hearing, Zhang pointed out that he had no prior criminal record, and could have a bright future once he completed his graduate degree. He stated that he was sorry for the way Nikki felt. Zhang submitted letters of support from his girlfriend and two local friends.
The district court considered Zhang's request for a deferred judgment and stated:
Considering what sentence will most fully provide for Mr. Zhang's rehabilitation while at the same time providing protection to the community, the Court must conclude that a deferral of judgment would be an inappropriate disposition. Mr. Zhang was hired by the victim of this offense who trusted Mr. Zhang to the extent that she allowed him to come to her home. She worked closely with him with the intention that she secure the benefit of his tutorial services. Instead, she became the victim of a crime in her own home from an individual who, to that point, she had evidenced substantial trust in. That trust was betrayed.
The court found that a deferred judgment would send an inappropriate message to Zhang and others in his position. The court concluded that a one-year jail sentence, with all but seven days suspended, would provide for Zhang's rehabilitation and the protection of the community.
We concur in the district court's statements and find no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed by the court. The court fully considered all of the relevant factors, and balancing these factors, determined a deferred judgment was not appropriate in this case. The sentence will give Zhang a chance to become rehabilitated, and will also deter him and others in a similar situation from engaging in similar acts.
We affirm Zhang's conviction and sentence.