For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here.
State of Iowa
v.
Jeremy Lee Hill
Appellee
State of Iowa
Appellant
Jeremy Lee Hill
Attorney for the Appellee
Richard Bennett, Assistant Attorney General
Attorney for the Appellant
Nathan A. Olson
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ. Opinion by Mullins, J. (12 pages)
Jeremy Hill appeals his conviction of theft in the second degree. Hill argues instruction sixteen was both an improper statement of the law on aiding and abetting and that it violated his constitutional rights. Hill also argues insufficient evidence was presented to support his conviction and he received ineffective assistance of counsel. OPINION HOLDS: Sufficient evidence was presented at trial to support Hill’s conviction of theft in the second degree. The marshaling instruction on theft in the second degree included an explanation of specific intent, but Hill’s counsel breached his duty in failing to object to the omission of the specific-intent language from the aiding-and-abetting instruction. However, because there is no reasonable probability a different outcome would have resulted if the instruction had been properly submitted to the jury, no prejudice has resulted, and we affirm.