State of Iowa v. Michael Alexander LaJeunesse
This text of State of Iowa v. Michael Alexander LaJeunesse (State of Iowa v. Michael Alexander LaJeunesse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 18-0263 Filed August 15, 2018
STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
MICHAEL ALEXANDER LAJEUNESSE, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg,
Judge.
Michael LaJeunesse challenges his restitution plan of payment.
AFFIRMED.
Patrick W. O'Bryan of O’Bryan Law Firm, Des Moines, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ. 2
McDONALD, Judge.
Michael LaJeunesse was convicted of attempted murder and willful injury
and sentenced to a term of incarceration not to exceed thirty-five years. This court
affirmed his convictions on direct appeal. See State v. LaJeunesse, No. 17-0507,
2018 WL 1099024, at *1 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 21, 2018). This appeal arises out of
LaJeunesse’s challenge to the district court’s order on restitution. Lajeunesse was
ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $11,234.70. Pursuant to a restitution
plan of payment, Lajeunesse was to pay twenty percent of all of credits to his
institutional account to satisfy his restitution obligation. LaJeunesse challenged
the restitution plan of payment. Following a restitution hearing, the district court
ordered the amount of restitution remain the same but modified the restitution plan
of payment by reducing the amount to be withheld from LaJeunesse’s institutional
account from twenty percent to fifteen percent. On appeal, LaJeunesse contends
the district court erred in failing to make a finding that LaJeunesse had the
reasonable ability to pay restitution.
We conclude LaJeunesse’s claim is without merit. Implicit in the district
court’s reduction of withholding from LaJenuesse’s institutional account is the
finding that LaJenuesse had the reasonable ability to pay the restitution ordered.
See State v. Klawonn, 688 N.W.2d 271, 274 (Iowa 2004) (setting forth standard of
review); State v. Van Hoff, 415 N.W.2d 657, 649 (Iowa 1987) (“A determination of
reasonableness, especially in a case of long-term incarceration, is more
appropriately based on the inmate’s ability to pay the current installments than his
ability to ultimately pay the total amount due.”); Clark v. State, No. 15-1280, 2017
WL 2461410, at *3 (Iowa Ct. App. June 7, 2017) (holding the defendant had the 3
reasonable ability to pay when payment was capped at twenty percent of the
offender’s institutional account credits). We affirm the district court’s order without
further opinion. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(a) and (e).
AFFIRMED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State of Iowa v. Michael Alexander LaJeunesse, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-iowa-v-michael-alexander-lajeunesse-iowactapp-2018.