State of Iowa
v.
Kamie Jo Schiebout
Defendant appealed from the judgment and sentence entered on her conviction of second-degree theft for writing checks on an account without authorization. She contended: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction because the state failed to prove she knew the checks would not be paid when presented, and failed to prove she received property, services, or money from the transactions; (2) the jury was not properly instructed on which checks it could aggregate to find her guilty of second-degree theft; and (3) the court erred in awarding the sheriff’s claim for reimbursement for medical aid she received while incarcerated. The court of appeals affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence in part and remanded with instructions. Defendant seeks further review.
Resister
State of Iowa
Applicant
Kamie Jo Schiebout
Attorney for the Resister
Thomas J. Ogden
Attorney for the Applicant
Mary K. Conroy
Supreme Court
Oral Argument Schedule
Non-Oral
Mar 10, 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 Sioux County, Patrick H. Tott and Jeffrey A. Neary, Judges. CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, J. (16 pages)
The defendant appeals her conviction and sentence for theft by check in the second degree contending the State failed to prove (1) that she knew the checks would not be paid and (2) that she received property, services, or money from the transactions. She also alleges the court improperly instructed the jury on aggregation. Lastly, she challenges the district court’s ruling that a sheriff’s reimbursement claim for $28,136 in medical aid under Iowa Code section 356.7 (2018) be listed as a civil judgment against her, when she was not represented by counsel at the hearing on the claim. OPINION HOLDS: Sufficient evidence supports her conviction, and we affirm the verdict. But on the medical aid, we remand for a hearing on the sheriff’s claim where the defendant is afforded the right to the assistance of counsel.