Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 19-0267

State of Iowa
v.
Jasmaine R. Warren

Jasmaine Warren seeks further review from the court of appeals decision affirming her conviction for driving while revoked. Warren argues she was illegally seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution, and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress.

County:
Polk
Trial Court Case No.:
OWOM085044

Resister

State of Iowa

Complainant

Jasmaine R. Warren

Attorneys for Resister

Israel Kodiaga

Attorneys for Complainant

Gina Messamer

Supreme Court

Oral Argument Schedule

15-15-5

Oct 15, 2020 9:00 AM

Briefs

Supreme Court Opinion

Opinion Number:
19-0267
Date Published:
Mar 05, 2021
Date Amended:
May 03, 2021

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
19-0267
Date Published:
May 13, 2020
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran, Doyle, Tabor, Mullins, Greer, Schumacher, and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  Partial Dissents by Vaitheswaran and Tabor, JJ.  (39 pages)

Jasmaine Warren appeals following her convictions of second-offense operating while intoxicated (OWI) and driving with a revoked license.  On appeal, Warren challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the OWI conviction and argues her counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to seek suppression of evidence on the basis that she was subjected to an unconstitutional seizure.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse Warren’s OWI conviction and remand the matter for a new trial on that count.  We find trial counsel was not ineffective as alleged and thus affirm Warren’s conviction of driving while revoked.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur in part and dissent in part.  I concur in Part A of the majority opinion.  I dissent from Part B of the majority opinion.  I would decline to reach the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel issue for the reasons stated in footnote 18 of the dissent.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent on the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel issue.  It is ill-advised to reject Warren’s complaint on direct appeal—and, in doing so, decide a question of first impression in Iowa—without a full airing of the facts bearing on the suppression challenge.  But if compelled to decide the question on the record we do have, I would find Warren proved by a preponderance of the evidence that her counsel breached a duty by not moving to suppress and prejudice resulted.  Warren’s parking violation did not authorize police to seize her in place of issuing a ticket.

View archived opinions from prior to November 2017

© 2022 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.