Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 18-1861

For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here

State of Iowa
v.
Antonyo Machado

Appellee

State of Iowa

Appellant

Antonyo Machado

Attorneys for Appellee

Bridget A. Chambers, Assistant Attorney General

Attorneys for Appellant

William Monroe

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
18-1861
Date Published:
Oct 23, 2019
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Emily Dean, District Associate Judge  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  Special concurrence by Doyle, J.  Dissent by Vaitheswaran, J.  (8 pages)

            Antonyo Machado appeals his plea of guilty to possession of a controlled substance, first offense, asserting the district court abused its discretion in imposing sentence rather than deferring judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: The record before us does not show Machado’s plea was conditioned upon the court granting Machado a deferred judgment.  The district court explained why it was not inclined to defer judgment, and the reasons given were not untenable or unreasonable.  The district court did not abuse its sentencing discretion.  We affirm.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Based upon the record, including Machado’s signing the State’s plea offer, I agree with the majority that the record does not show Machado’s plea was conditioned upon the court granting him a deferred judgment.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I believe the plea was conditioned upon the court’s concurrence and, when the district court declined to grant Machado a deferred judgment as set forth in the written plea of guilty, the court was obligated to afford Machado the opportunity to withdraw the plea.   

© 2022 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.