Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 23-0964

State of Iowa
v.
Hope Jennifer Clark

Hope Jennifer Clark seeks further review of the court of appeals opinion affirming her conviction of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. The court of appeals determined that there was sufficient evidence to support her conviction, the district court did not err in allowing the State to introduce evidence of a dispatcher’s report of a reckless driver, and the district court properly denied her motion to suppress evidence regarding her refusal to submit to testing because she was not denied her statutory right to contact her attorney after reaching the jail. Clark seeks further review.

County:
Des Moines

Resister

State of Iowa

Applicant

Hope Jennifer Clark

Attorney for the Resister

Joshua A. Duden

Attorney for the Applicant

Kent A. Simmons

Supreme Court

Oral Argument Schedule

15-15-5

Mar 26, 2025 9:00 AM

Briefs

Supreme Court Opinion

Opinion Number:
23-0964
Date Published:
May 23, 2025

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
23-0964
Date Published:
Sep 18, 2024
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Emily Dean, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Hope Clark appeals her conviction for operating while intoxicated.  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the district court’s denial of her motion to suppress, and the district court’s admission of evidence she claims is hearsay not subject to an exception.  OPINION HOLDS: Clark’s conviction is supported by substantial evidence.  The district court did not err in denying Clark’s motion to suppress.  The evidence Clark claims is hearsay did not amount to hearsay because it was admitted to explain officers’ responsive conduct rather than for the truth of the matter asserted.  Even if the evidence went beyond the explaining responsive conduct, Clark failed to object to the evidence as going beyond the permissive scope.  Moreover, the State established that even if the evidence was improperly admitted for the truth of the matter asserted, it did not result in prejudice.

© 2025 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.