Iowa Supreme Court will review Floyd County case ruling

By Bob Steenson, bsteenson@charlescitypress.com

The Iowa Supreme Court has decided to review one case from Floyd County, turned down review on another and is still considering two more.

The court released a list on Friday of its latest decisions on granting further review of Iowa Court of Appeals rulings.

The Supreme Court granted further review of a case where the Court of Appeals had voted 5-4 to overturn the sentence of a person convicted of raping a 14-year-old girl.

Sean David Gordon of Charles City, now age 27, pleaded guilty to third-degree sexual abuse and was sentenced in March 2017 to 10 years in prison.

According to court records, Gordon, then 23 years old, convinced a 14-year-old friend of the family to pose for nude pictures and then had sex with her in June 2016. After the girl told her mother about the incident, Gordon was arrested and charged with the Class 3 felony.

Iowa Code makes it a crime for any person four or more years older to have sex with a person who is 14.

After Gordon pleaded guilty, the court ordered a presentence investigation, which is routine.

As part of that investigation, Gordon’s probation officer referred him for a psychosexual assessment to assist in predicting the likelihood of sexual and violent re-offenses. One test showed “average risk” for recidivism and another showed “high risk.”

District Court Judge DeDra Schroeder referred to the assessments when she sentenced Gordon.

Although the presentence investigation report had recommended that Gordon receive a suspended sentence and be placed in a community-based residential facility, Schroeder sentenced him to a term up to 10 years in prison.

Gordon appealed the sentence, arguing that the psychosexual assessment should not have been considered in determining sentencing and making other arguments as well.

The Iowa Court of Appeals agreed on a split vote that the assessments should not have been considered and vacated the sentence, returning the case to Floyd County District Court for resentencing.

The appeals court ruled that the state Legislature had not included using a person’s risk-level scores in determining the length of a person’s sentence, although they have been allowed for other uses.

“Risk assessment tools validated for one purpose may not be fit for another,” the Court of Appeals decision said.

“The assessment also noted it was ‘prepared expressly for the Department of Correctional Services’ and did not suggest it should be considered by the sentencing court. Yet the sentencing court did not heed those warnings,” the appeals court wrote.

Four of the appeals court judges dissented, making various arguments on how the majority decision came to its conclusion and arguing that a judge has considerable latitude in determining what information to use in deciding on a sentence.

The Iowa Supreme Court will now review the appeals court’s decision. No date has been set for the appeal.

• The Supreme Court declined to review the case of Anthony Schmitz, an Ionia man who pleaded guilty to child endangerment resulting in serious injury, a Class C felony, and serious injury by a vehicle, a Class D felony, and who was sentenced to up to 15 years in prison.

Schmitz appealed his sentence, arguing that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to object to two victim impact statements being read at his sentencing hearing that were from people who did not meet the legal definition of victims.

Schmitz, now age 45, pleaded guilty in February to charges that resulted from a two-vehicle head-on crash that injured the driver of a vehicle he struck and also injured two of his daughters who were in the vehicle with him.

At the time of the accident Schmitz tested positive for the presence of methamphetamine in his body.

In the ruling by a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals, the court ruled that one of the persons who read a victim impact statement at the hearing should not have been allowed to do so and Schmitz’s attorney should have objected, but the court said the statement did not play a role in influencing the district court judge’s decision on sentencing.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s sentence, and the Iowa Supreme Court declined to review that decision.

In two other cases, the Iowa Supreme Court said it will consider whether to review appeals court rulings.

• The first is the case of Anthony Page, who appealed his judgment and sentence after being convicted of domestic abuse assault while displaying a dangerous weapon. The Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction, vacated part of his sentence and confirmed another part, and sent the case back to Floyd County District Court for resentencing.

• The other case the Supreme Court is considering reviewing is the conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver by Samuel Dight, now age 24, who argues that his guilty plea should be overturned because he was not aware of additional surcharge fees he would be required to pay when he agreed to the plea.

The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the verdict, but preserved a claim of ineffective counsel for postconviction relief.