City of Cedar Rapids v. Klees

Supreme Court of Iowa

City of Cedar Rapids v. Klees

201 N.W.2d 920, 1972 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1003

CourtSupreme Court of Iowa

DecidedNovember 15, 1972

Docket55188

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 201 N.W.2d 920 (City of Cedar Rapids v. Klees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Cedar Rapids v. Klees, 201 N.W.2d 920, 1972 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1003 (iowa 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Defendant was charged in the Municipal Court of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, with driving a motorcycle 60 miles per hour in a 25-mile-per-hour zone, a nonindictable offense under city ordinance. After pleading guilty, he was sentenced to a fine of $25 or, on non-payment, to seven days in jail. He appealed to district court. Code, 1971, § 762.48. After trial de novo, that court found him guilty and, based on the evidence before it, sentenced him to five days in jail with provision for release under the work-release statute. Code, 1971, § 356.26. Defendant then appealed to this court, contending that his allegedly harsher sentence in district court is a violation of his constitutional rights.

Prior to defendant’s appeal to us, the United States Supreme Court decided North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656. That case dealt with retrial on remand. During the pendency of defendant’s present appeal, however, the Court decided Colten v. Kentucky, 407 U.S. 104, 92 S.Ct. 1953, 32 L.Ed. 2d 584. That case dealt with trial de novo on appeal, such as we have here. Defendant’s contentions are answered by the Col-ten decision.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Defendant was charged in the Municipal Court of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, with driving a motorcycle 60 miles per hour in a 25-mile-per-hour zone, a nonindictable offense under city ordinance. After pleading guilty, he was sentenced to a fine of $25 or, on non-payment, to seven days in jail. He appealed to district court. Code, 1971, § 762.48. After trial de novo, that court found him guilty and, based on the evidence before it, sentenced him to five days in jail with provision for release under the work-release statute. Code, 1971, § 356.26. Defendant then appealed to this court, contending that his allegedly harsher sentence in district court is a violation of his constitutional rights.

Prior to defendant’s appeal to us, the United States Supreme Court decided North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656. That case dealt with retrial on remand. During the pendency of defendant’s present appeal, however, the Court decided Colten v. Kentucky, 407 U.S. 104, 92 S.Ct. 1953, 32 L.Ed. 2d 584. That case dealt with trial de novo on appeal, such as we have here. Defendant’s contentions are answered by the Col-ten decision.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 N.W.2d 920, 1972 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1003, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-cedar-rapids-v-klees-iowa-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack