State of Iowa
v.
Christopher Lee Roby Jr.
Christopher Roby seeks further review after the court of appeals affirmed his convictions and sentences for sexual abuse in the third degree, possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, and eluding. Roby contends his trial counsel was ineffective by: (1) failing to challenge the State’s decision to pursue the eluding charge as a violation of the constitutional prohibitions against double jeopardy; (2) failing to challenge the constitutionality of his arrest warrant; (3) failing to argue his bond was excessive; (4) allowing him to enter a guilty plea to possession with intent to deliver without a sufficient factual basis; (5) failing to ensure his guilty pleas were knowing and voluntary; and (6) committing structural error.
Resister
State of Iowa
Applicant
Christopher Lee Roby Jr.
Attorney for the Resister
Louis S. Sloven
Attorney for the Applicant
Marti D. Nerenstone
Supreme Court
Oral Argument Schedule
Non-Oral
Sep 17, 2020 1:30 PM
Briefs
Supreme Court Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Date Amended:
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Alan T. Heavens and Kellyann M. Lekar, Judges. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Greer, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (14 pages)
Christopher Roby appeals from his convictions and sentences for sexual abuse in the third degree, possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, and eluding. Roby argues his counsel was ineffective by failing to challenge his arrest, bail, and guilty pleas. OPINION HOLDS: We find all of Roby’s arguments without merit and affirm.