State of Iowa
v.
Ronald Eugene Cooley
Ronald Cooley seeks further review of the court of appeals decision that upheld his conviction for failing to register on the sex offender registry. Cooley argues that “appear in person” is an essential element of the failure to register offense under Iowa Code § 692A.104(2), and the district court erred when it omitted that language from its jury instructions.
Resister
State of Iowa
Applicant
Ronald Eugene Cooley
Attorney for the Resister
Nicholas E. Siefert
Attorney for the Applicant
Thomas M. McIntee
Supreme Court
Oral Argument Schedule
Non-Oral
Apr 16, 2025 1:30 PM
Briefs
Supreme Court Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (9 pages)
Ronald Cooley challenges his conviction for failing to comply with the sex offender registration requirements, second offense. Cooley argues his conviction should be reversed because he was unable to comply with the statute as written—by registering in person—due to the local government’s decision to close the sheriff’s office during the COVID-19 pandemic. More specifically, he maintains (1) the local decision to close the sheriff’s office and require offenders to register via alternative means (without the Iowa legislature amending the statute) amounts to a constitutional violation of the separation-of-powers doctrine and is fatal to applying the statute against him; (2) the marshalling jury instruction was in error because it did not include the statutory requirement that he register in person; and (3) there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction. OPINION HOLDS: Because Cooley failed to preserve his separation-of-powers claim, the marshalling instruction was proper in this case, and sufficient evidence supports his conviction, we affirm.