IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 24-1286 Filed August 20, 2025
STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
DESHAWN ARMAL WASHINGTON, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen,
Judge.
A defendant appeals his convictions for second-degree murder and felon in
possession of a firearm. AFFIRMED.
Martha J. Lucey, State Appellate Defender, and Theresa R. Wilson,
Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and
Langholz, JJ. Telleen, S.J., takes no part. 2
TABOR, Chief Judge.
A jury convicted Deshawn Washington of second-degree murder and felon
in possession of a firearm. Washington appeals, contending the State failed to
prove he shot and killed Andre Clanton. Finding substantial evidence in the record
that Washington was the shooter and that he possessed a firearm as a prohibited
person, we affirm.
I. Facts and Prior Proceedings
Washington’s friend, Shakela, invited Washington and his brother, Donald,
to her home in the early morning hours on a weekend in May 2023.1 She had
known the brothers since she was a teenager. While they were hanging out inside,
a car pulled up to the house. Shakela told her guests that Andre, the father of her
child, had unexpectedly shown up. She asked the brothers to hide and quiet down.
Andre came to the front door and started knocking. Washington laughed,
alerting Andre that someone other than Shakela was inside. Shakela urged the
brothers to leave through the back door. As they sneaked out the back, she invited
Andre in the front door. After scouring the house for whomever he heard laughing,
Andre stepped back onto the front porch. From just inside the front door, Shakela
watched as Andre paused at the end of the porch.
Meanwhile, Shakela’s mother, Temika, was asleep upstairs. She came
down when she “heard banging on the door.” Once downstairs, Temika saw Andre
and Shakela talking in the doorway. After Andre stepped onto the porch, Temika
1 Since they share a last name, we will call the defendant Washington and use his
brother’s first name. 3
followed. From this vantage point, Temika saw the brothers come around the side
of the house. Andre asked, “What [are] you all doing here?”
Then, without warning, one brother drew a handgun and shot Andre in the
head, killing him. The brothers fled the scene in a gold Dodge Journey—the
shooter in the driver’s seat. Distraught, Shakela called 911 and handed the phone
to Temika, who spoke with a dispatcher until first responders arrived.
In the following days, law enforcement worked to identify and locate the
shooter.2 Shakela and Temika provided similar accounts of the shooting.3
Surveillance footage showed a gold Dodge Journey leaving the neighborhood after
the shooting and traveling across Davenport into Rock Island, Illinois. Police later
discovered the same vehicle parked outside a residence associated with
Washington in Rock Island. They arrested Washington and executed a search
warrant at that residence.
After his arrest, Davenport police searched Washington’s cell phone and
online accounts.4 Location data from Washington’s phone showed him travelling
from Rock Island to Shakela’s house in Davenport shortly before four o’clock on
the morning of the shooting. The search of Washington’s phone also revealed “a
2 Investigators never found the gun, bullet, or shell casing used in the shooting.
Police collected Shakela’s 9-millimeter handgun, which was hidden between the couch cushions in her living room, as evidence. But that gun was unloaded, and the magazine was in her vehicle parked in the driveway. 3 Detectives also interviewed Donald. He denied “knowing anyone named Deshawn” and did not provide any information about the shooting. 4 Police also searched Donald’s cell phone. That search revealed a Snapchat
video of Donald brandishing a loaded .380 caliber Glock handgun inside a car and messages indicating that the brothers were together the morning of the shooting. 4
gap in data generated by the phone between 5:00 and 11:30” that morning.5
Shortly after that, Washington searched “shooting in Davenport” on a private online
search engine. Police also reviewed Facebook messages between Shakela and
Washington from around the time of the shooting. In a Facebook message
exchange the day after the shooting, Shakela asked Washington, “Why did you
shoot him??” He responded: “Innocent.” He also wrote: “They’re on the wrong
Shawn.”6
The State charged Washington with first-degree murder, a class “A” felony,
in violation of Iowa Code section 707.2 (2023) and felon in possession of a firearm,
a class “D” felony with a habitual-offender enhancement, in violation of
sections 724.26(1) and 902.8. He pleaded not guilty.
At trial, Shakela identified Washington as the shooter. She testified that she
“heard the shot, saw Andre fall, and Shawn putting the gun back in his pocket.”
She also testified that Shawn was “bigger” than Donald. Temika—who wasn’t
familiar with the brothers—identified “the taller guy” as the shooter.
The jury found Washington guilty of the firearm-possession count and the
lesser offense of second-degree murder, a class “B” felony, in violation of Iowa
Code section 707.3. The district court sentenced him to an indeterminate fifty-year
prison term with a thirty-five-year mandatory minimum for the murder count and an
indeterminate fifteen-year prison term with a three-year mandatory minimum for
5 A detective testified that Washington’s “phone being off” or “being in airplane
mode” were possible explanations for the “gap in data” during that timeframe. Dispatchers received the 911 call from Shakela and Temika at 4:57 a.m. 6 DeShawn Washington is known as Shawn. 5
the firearm-possession count. The sentences are to run consecutively.
Washington appeals.
II. Scope and Standard of Review
We review sufficiency-of-the-evidence claims for correction of errors at law.
State v. Crawford, 974 N.W.2d 510, 516 (Iowa 2022). We consider “whether, taken
in the light most favorable to the State, the finding of guilt is supported by
substantial evidence in the record.” Id. (citation omitted). Evidence is substantial
if it “would convince a rational fact finder the defendant is guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.” Id. (citation omitted). “We draw all fair and reasonable
inferences that may be deduced from the evidence in the record.” State v. Meyers,
799 N.W.2d 132, 138 (Iowa 2011). Evidence that rises only to suspicion,
speculation, or conjecture is not enough. State v. Casady, 491 N.W.2d 782, 787
(Iowa 1992).
III. Analysis
To convict Washington of second-degree murder, the State had to prove:
1. On or about May 21, 2023, [Washington] shot Andre Clanton. 2. Andre Clanton died as a result of being shot. 3. [Washington] acted with malice aforethought.
And to convict Washington of felon in possession of a firearm, the State had to
prove:
1.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 24-1286 Filed August 20, 2025
STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
DESHAWN ARMAL WASHINGTON, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen,
Judge.
A defendant appeals his convictions for second-degree murder and felon in
possession of a firearm. AFFIRMED.
Martha J. Lucey, State Appellate Defender, and Theresa R. Wilson,
Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and
Langholz, JJ. Telleen, S.J., takes no part. 2
TABOR, Chief Judge.
A jury convicted Deshawn Washington of second-degree murder and felon
in possession of a firearm. Washington appeals, contending the State failed to
prove he shot and killed Andre Clanton. Finding substantial evidence in the record
that Washington was the shooter and that he possessed a firearm as a prohibited
person, we affirm.
I. Facts and Prior Proceedings
Washington’s friend, Shakela, invited Washington and his brother, Donald,
to her home in the early morning hours on a weekend in May 2023.1 She had
known the brothers since she was a teenager. While they were hanging out inside,
a car pulled up to the house. Shakela told her guests that Andre, the father of her
child, had unexpectedly shown up. She asked the brothers to hide and quiet down.
Andre came to the front door and started knocking. Washington laughed,
alerting Andre that someone other than Shakela was inside. Shakela urged the
brothers to leave through the back door. As they sneaked out the back, she invited
Andre in the front door. After scouring the house for whomever he heard laughing,
Andre stepped back onto the front porch. From just inside the front door, Shakela
watched as Andre paused at the end of the porch.
Meanwhile, Shakela’s mother, Temika, was asleep upstairs. She came
down when she “heard banging on the door.” Once downstairs, Temika saw Andre
and Shakela talking in the doorway. After Andre stepped onto the porch, Temika
1 Since they share a last name, we will call the defendant Washington and use his
brother’s first name. 3
followed. From this vantage point, Temika saw the brothers come around the side
of the house. Andre asked, “What [are] you all doing here?”
Then, without warning, one brother drew a handgun and shot Andre in the
head, killing him. The brothers fled the scene in a gold Dodge Journey—the
shooter in the driver’s seat. Distraught, Shakela called 911 and handed the phone
to Temika, who spoke with a dispatcher until first responders arrived.
In the following days, law enforcement worked to identify and locate the
shooter.2 Shakela and Temika provided similar accounts of the shooting.3
Surveillance footage showed a gold Dodge Journey leaving the neighborhood after
the shooting and traveling across Davenport into Rock Island, Illinois. Police later
discovered the same vehicle parked outside a residence associated with
Washington in Rock Island. They arrested Washington and executed a search
warrant at that residence.
After his arrest, Davenport police searched Washington’s cell phone and
online accounts.4 Location data from Washington’s phone showed him travelling
from Rock Island to Shakela’s house in Davenport shortly before four o’clock on
the morning of the shooting. The search of Washington’s phone also revealed “a
2 Investigators never found the gun, bullet, or shell casing used in the shooting.
Police collected Shakela’s 9-millimeter handgun, which was hidden between the couch cushions in her living room, as evidence. But that gun was unloaded, and the magazine was in her vehicle parked in the driveway. 3 Detectives also interviewed Donald. He denied “knowing anyone named Deshawn” and did not provide any information about the shooting. 4 Police also searched Donald’s cell phone. That search revealed a Snapchat
video of Donald brandishing a loaded .380 caliber Glock handgun inside a car and messages indicating that the brothers were together the morning of the shooting. 4
gap in data generated by the phone between 5:00 and 11:30” that morning.5
Shortly after that, Washington searched “shooting in Davenport” on a private online
search engine. Police also reviewed Facebook messages between Shakela and
Washington from around the time of the shooting. In a Facebook message
exchange the day after the shooting, Shakela asked Washington, “Why did you
shoot him??” He responded: “Innocent.” He also wrote: “They’re on the wrong
Shawn.”6
The State charged Washington with first-degree murder, a class “A” felony,
in violation of Iowa Code section 707.2 (2023) and felon in possession of a firearm,
a class “D” felony with a habitual-offender enhancement, in violation of
sections 724.26(1) and 902.8. He pleaded not guilty.
At trial, Shakela identified Washington as the shooter. She testified that she
“heard the shot, saw Andre fall, and Shawn putting the gun back in his pocket.”
She also testified that Shawn was “bigger” than Donald. Temika—who wasn’t
familiar with the brothers—identified “the taller guy” as the shooter.
The jury found Washington guilty of the firearm-possession count and the
lesser offense of second-degree murder, a class “B” felony, in violation of Iowa
Code section 707.3. The district court sentenced him to an indeterminate fifty-year
prison term with a thirty-five-year mandatory minimum for the murder count and an
indeterminate fifteen-year prison term with a three-year mandatory minimum for
5 A detective testified that Washington’s “phone being off” or “being in airplane
mode” were possible explanations for the “gap in data” during that timeframe. Dispatchers received the 911 call from Shakela and Temika at 4:57 a.m. 6 DeShawn Washington is known as Shawn. 5
the firearm-possession count. The sentences are to run consecutively.
Washington appeals.
II. Scope and Standard of Review
We review sufficiency-of-the-evidence claims for correction of errors at law.
State v. Crawford, 974 N.W.2d 510, 516 (Iowa 2022). We consider “whether, taken
in the light most favorable to the State, the finding of guilt is supported by
substantial evidence in the record.” Id. (citation omitted). Evidence is substantial
if it “would convince a rational fact finder the defendant is guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.” Id. (citation omitted). “We draw all fair and reasonable
inferences that may be deduced from the evidence in the record.” State v. Meyers,
799 N.W.2d 132, 138 (Iowa 2011). Evidence that rises only to suspicion,
speculation, or conjecture is not enough. State v. Casady, 491 N.W.2d 782, 787
(Iowa 1992).
III. Analysis
To convict Washington of second-degree murder, the State had to prove:
1. On or about May 21, 2023, [Washington] shot Andre Clanton. 2. Andre Clanton died as a result of being shot. 3. [Washington] acted with malice aforethought.
And to convict Washington of felon in possession of a firearm, the State had to
prove:
1. On or about May 21, 2023, [Washington] knowingly possessed or had under his dominion and control a firearm. 2. [Washington] was prohibited from possessing a firearm.
The parties stipulated that Washington was prohibited from possessing a firearm. 6
Washington challenges the State’s proof of his identity for both offenses.
“Identity is an element of a criminal offense which the State must prove beyond a
reasonable doubt.” State v. Jensen, 216 N.W.2d 369, 374 (Iowa 1974).
Washington concedes that the State presented substantial evidence placing him
and Donald at Shakela’s house at the time of the shooting. But he argues that “the
evidence did not conclusively establish” he shot and killed Andre. He questions
the credibility of Shakela’s testimony identifying him as the shooter, emphasizing
minor inconsistencies between Shakela’s and Temika’s versions of events. He
also suggests that “Shakela had a reason to place the blame on” him for the
shooting. And he contends that Temika “could not specifically identify the shooter.”
But he acknowledges that Temika identified the “taller” brother as the gunman, and
the State presented evidence which “suggested that [Washington] was taller than
his brother Donald.”7
Washington’s appellate arguments are aimed at persuading jurors, who are
charged with judging witness credibility and deciding the weight to give certain
evidence. See State v. Blair, 347 N.W.2d 416, 420 (Iowa 1984) (“[T]he jury is at
liberty to believe or disbelieve the testimony of witnesses as it chooses and give
such weight to the evidence as in its judgment the evidence was entitled to
receive.” (internal citations omitted)). But in reviewing sufficiency challenges, it is
not our role “to resolve conflicts in the evidence, to pass upon the credibility of
witnesses, to determine the plausibility of explanations, or to weigh the evidence.”
State v. Williams, 695 N.W.2d 23, 28 (Iowa 2005) (citation omitted).
7 In addition to Shakela’s testimony that Washington was “bigger” than Donald, the
State presented photos of the two brothers showing the differences in their builds. 7
Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the State, substantial
evidence supports the jury’s finding that Washington shot Andre. The State’s
evidence went well beyond speculation, suspicion, or conjecture. In making its
case, the State presented both direct evidence in the form of eyewitness testimony
and circumstantial evidence, including incriminating activity on Washington’s cell
phone. That evidence would allow a rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable
doubt that he was the shooter. We likewise identify sufficient evidence supporting
his firearm-possession conviction. So we affirm on both counts.
AFFIRMED.