State of Iowa
v.
Jon Arthur Dieckmann
Defendant appealed the judgment and sentence entered on his convictions for attempted burglary in the second degree and possession of burglar’s tools. He contended his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to: (1) challenge the sufficiency of the evidence; (2) object to the marshalling instruction on the attempted burglary charge; (3) make certain evidentiary objections; and (4) move for a mistrial. He also contended the trial court erred in ordering that he make restitution for his appellate attorney fees unless he filed a request for a hearing on the issue of his reasonable ability to pay. The court of appeals found trial counsel was not ineffective in failing to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence and preserved the remaining ineffective assistance claims for postconviction relief. The court of appeals also concluded the district court did not err in its discussion of the appellate attorney fee issue in its sentencing order. Defendant seeks further review.
Resister
State of Iowa
Applicant
Jon Arthur Dieckmann
Attorney for the Resister
Zachary Miller
Attorney for the Applicant
Mary K. Conroy
Supreme Court
Oral Argument Schedule
Non-Oral
Apr 09, 2019 9:00 AM
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 Scott County, Marlita A. Greve, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Vogel, J. (9 pages)
Jon Dieckmann appeals his conviction and sentence for attempted burglary in the second degree and possession of burglar’s tools. He argues his counsel was ineffective on several grounds and the district court improperly assessed appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: We find his counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, we preserve his other ineffective-assistance claims, and we find the court did not err in addressing appellate attorney fees.