Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 18-0605

State of Iowa
v.
Daniel Joseph Thurman, III

Appellee

State of Iowa

Appellant

Daniel Joseph Thurman, III

Attorneys for Appellee

Tyler J. Buller, Assistant Attorney General

Attorneys for Appellant

Martha J. Lucey, State Appellate Defender, and Brenda J. Gohr (until withdrawal), Assistant Appellate Defender

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
18-0605
Date Published:
Feb 05, 2020
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Greer, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, J. (5 pages)

           

            Daniel Thurman appeals the sentence imposed after his Alford plea to nine offenses.  Thurman argues the district court considered improper sentencing factors when it considered (1) his scores on standardized risk assessment tools and (2) the department of correctional services (DCS) sentencing recommendation in the presentence investigation report (PSI).  OPINION HOLDS: Thurman did not preserve his claims for our review, but these claims fail as a matter of law even under an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel framework.  The Iowa Supreme Court in State v. Headley, 926 N.W.2d 545, 551 (Iowa 2019), concluded that the sentencing court does not abuse its discretion in considering risk assessment tools on their face in the PSI, nor does the court abuse its discretion in considering the DCS sentencing recommendation.  For these reasons, Thurman cannot show his counsel breached an essential duty in failing to object on these grounds at sentencing.  We affirm.

© 2022 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.