State of Iowa v. Robert Eugene Wimer

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 23-0153 Filed August 7, 2024

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

ROBERT EUGENE WIMER, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Stacy Ritchie,

Judge.

The appellant challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to end the

requirement he register as a sex offender, asserting the continued requirement

constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. AFFIRMED.

Karmen R. Anderson, Des Moines, for appellant.

Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Olivia D. Brooks, Assistant Attorney

General, for appellee.

Considered by Tabor, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.*

*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206

(2024). 2

POTTERFIELD, Senior Judge.

Robert Wimer appeals the denial of his motion to end the requirement he

register as a sex offender. Wimer does not challenge the district court’s application

of law or conclusions reached in denying the motion; he argues for the first time

on appeal that his continued requirement to register as a sex offender—which is

set to last until 2031—constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. See U.S. Const.

amend. VIII; Iowa Const. art. I, § 17.

But as the State argues, the requirement to register as a sex offender is not

“punishment.” See Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 105–06 (2003) (holding Alaska’s

Sex Offender Registry Act, which contains a registration requirement and

notification system, nonpunitive); State v. Aschbrenner, 926 N.W.2d 240, 248

(Iowa 2019) (“[E]very circuit of the United States Court of Appeals has concluded

that sex offender registration statutes are nonpunitive.”); State v. Hess, 983

N.W.2d 279, 285 (Iowa 2022) (reiterating that for adult offenders, “mandatory sex

offender registration remains nonpunitive”); State v. Sallis, 786 N.W.2d 508, 517

(Iowa Ct. App. 2009) (holding “the registration requirement” is “not ‘punishment’”);

State v. Pickens, 558 N.W.2d 396, 400 (Iowa 1997) (holding the registration

requirement is “remedial” and “not punitive” (citation omitted)). And because the

registration requirement is not punishment, it cannot be cruel and unusual

punishment. See In re T.H., 913 N.W.2d 578, 587 (Iowa 2018) (“Before we can

assess whether mandatory sex offender registration for certain juveniles is cruel

and unusual, we must first determine that registration is, in fact, punishment.”);

Doe v. Miller, 405 F.3d 700, 723 n.6 (8th Cir. 2005) (“In view of our conclusion that 3

the statute is not punitive, it follows that the law is not a ‘cruel and unusual

punishment’ in violation of the Eighth Amendment.”).

Without further consideration, we affirm. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(a), (c),

(e).

AFFIRMED.