State of Iowa v. Thomas E. Reuther

Court of Appeals of Iowa

State of Iowa v. Thomas E. Reuther

919 N.W.2d 767

CourtCourt of Appeals of Iowa

DecidedJune 6, 2018

Docket17-1065

StatusPublished

This text of 919 N.W.2d 767 (State of Iowa v. Thomas E. Reuther) 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.

Bluebook

State of Iowa v. Thomas E. Reuther, 919 N.W.2d 767 (iowactapp 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

MCDONALD, Judge.

Thomas Reuther pleaded guilty to escape from custody, in violation of Iowa Code section 719.4(1) (2016), after he, in his own words, "ran" away from the residential correctional facility to which he had been paroled. On appeal, Reuther contends his plea counsel provided constitutionally deficient representation in failing to file a motion in arrest of judgment because there was no factual basis in support of the guilty plea. On de novo review, we conclude the claim is without merit; the record as a whole supports a factual basis for each element of the offense. See State v. Miller , 841 N.W.2d 583 , 591 (Iowa 2014) (discussing historical development of escape statute and elements of the offense); State v. Ortiz , 789 N.W.2d 761 , 764 (Iowa 2010) (stating standard of review is de novo for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in allowing the defendant to plead guilty in the absence of a factual basis and setting forth the elements of the claim). We affirm the defendant's conviction 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

MCDONALD, Judge.

Thomas Reuther pleaded guilty to escape from custody, in violation of Iowa Code section 719.4(1) (2016), after he, in his own words, "ran" away from the residential correctional facility to which he had been paroled. On appeal, Reuther contends his plea counsel provided constitutionally deficient representation in failing to file a motion in arrest of judgment because there was no factual basis in support of the guilty plea. On de novo review, we conclude the claim is without merit; the record as a whole supports a factual basis for each element of the offense. See State v. Miller , 841 N.W.2d 583 , 591 (Iowa 2014) (discussing historical development of escape statute and elements of the offense); State v. Ortiz , 789 N.W.2d 761 , 764 (Iowa 2010) (stating standard of review is de novo for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in allowing the defendant to plead guilty in the absence of a factual basis and setting forth the elements of the claim). We affirm the defendant's conviction without further opinion. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(a) and (e).

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

919 N.W.2d 767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-iowa-v-thomas-e-reuther-iowactapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack