Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 17-1653

State of Iowa
v.
Charles P. Phipps

Appellee

State of Iowa

Appellant

Charles P. Phipps

Attorney for the Appellee

Thomas E. Bakke, Assistant Attorney General

Attorney for the Appellant

Maria L. Ruhtenberg, Assistant Appellate Defender

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
17-1653
Date Published:
Sep 26, 2018
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Myron L. Gookin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Charles Phipps appeals from his conviction for assault while displaying a dangerous weapon.  Phipps maintains (1) the trial court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal because assault while displaying a dangerous weapon is a specific-intent crime and the State did not provide substantial evidence regarding his specific intent, (2) trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the jury instruction that assault with a dangerous weapon is a general-intent crime, and (3) the court abused its discretion in denying his motion for mistrial after a witness’s testimony exceeded the minutes of evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Phipps failed to object to the jury instructions, his sufficiency-of-the-evidence argument is at odds with the law of the case, and we decline to consider it.  His argument he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel fails, as he has not established the elements of ineffective assistance of counsel.  And we cannot say the district court abused its discretion when it denied Phipps’s motion for mistrial but struck from the record the testimony Phipps challenged as outside of the minutes and instructed the jury not to consider that testimony.  We affirm.

© 2023 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.