Joshua Andrew Powell
v.
State of Iowa
Appellant
Joshua Andrew Powell
Appellee
State of Iowa
Attorney for the Appellant
Nathan A. Mundy
Attorney for the Appellee
Linda J. Hines, Assistant Attorney General
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, William C. Ostlund, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (19 pages)
Joshua Powell appeals from the denial of his postconviction-relief application, raising various claims of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude Powell’s trial attorneys did not breach an essential duty in failing to move for a change of venue. We also conclude Powell’s trial attorneys did not breach an essential duty in declining to present a diminished responsibility or intoxication defense, as they thoughtfully considered those issues. Additionally, we find Powell’s trial attorneys were not ineffective in handling the testimony of the medical examiner. Applying precedent, we further conclude Powell’s trial attorneys breached no essential duty in failing to argue his Fifth Amendment right to counsel was violated, and it follows appellate counsel was not ineffective in failing to raise the issue. And, because substantial evidence supports a finding of malice aforethought in this case, the failure of Powell’s attorneys to challenge that element could not have been prejudicial. We find Powell’s trial attorneys did not breach an essential duty in failing to challenge the sufficiency of the trial information, and as such it follows that appellate counsel was not ineffective in failing to raise the issue. Moreover, we agree with the postconviction court’s conclusion that “[e]ven if the trial court erred in not granting the strike for cause,” Powell did not establish prejudice. Finally, we conclude counsel did not breach an essential duty in failing to request a hearing on the stun device issue. Accordingly, affirm the postconviction court’s denial of Powell’s postconviction-relief application.
