State of Iowa
v.
Daniel Joseph Thurman, III
Appellee
State of Iowa
Appellant
Daniel Joseph Thurman, III
Attorney for the Appellee
Tyler J. Buller, Assistant Attorney General
Attorney for the 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:
Date Published:
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.
