Brett Noble v. Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, 919 N.W.2d 625

Brett Noble pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to attempted murder, first-degree theft, voluntary manslaughter, and felony assault; plea memorandum contained a stipulation the offense conduct for each count was separate and an express waiver of merger/estoppel challenges.
The plea colloquy and minutes of testimony established the same act—kicking the victim in the head with steel-toed boots—was the factual basis for both attempted murder and voluntary manslaughter.
Noble first filed a motion to correct illegal sentence (raising merger/double jeopardy arguments); it was denied and an appeal was dismissed as frivolous.
After the Iowa Supreme Court decided State v. Ceretti (holding a defendant may not be convicted of both attempted and completed homicide based on the same acts), Noble filed a second motion to correct illegal sentence invoking Ceretti.
The district court denied the second motion; on certiorari the Court of Appeals held Ceretti applies, Noble could not waive the defect, and his claims were not barred by res judicata.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Noble)	State's Argument	Held
Whether a defendant can be convicted of both attempted murder and voluntary manslaughter where both convictions rest on the same act against the same victim	Noble: convictions are void/illegal under Ceretti because one cannot both attempt and complete the same homicide	State: Ceretti inapplicable because Noble stipulated the conduct was separate and waived merger/estoppel; claim is res judicata	Held: Ceretti applies; convictions are based on the same act and violate Ceretti
Whether Noble waived the right to challenge the convictions/sentences by plea and express waiver language	Noble: plea waiver should not prevent relief under Ceretti	State: express waiver of merger/estoppel bars the claim	Held: Waiver does not bar relief — illegal-sentence rule/Ceretti cannot be waived by plea
Whether the defendant’s stipulation that the offense conduct was separate precludes Ceretti relief	State: the stipulation makes Ceretti inapplicable	Noble: record (colloquy & minutes) shows same-act basis despite stipulation	Held: Court disregards stipulation when contrary to record; convictions based on same act
Whether the claim is barred by res judicata because Noble litigated similar issues earlier	State: prior motion decided, claim precluded	Noble: Ceretti is an intervening change in law and the prior motion raised different merger issues	Held: Not barred — Ceretti is a new substantive rule and prior litigation did not decide it

State v. Ceretti, 871 N.W.2d 88 (Iowa 2015) (announcing rule that a defendant may not be convicted of both attempted and completed homicide when based on the same acts)
State v. Fix, 830 N.W.2d 744 (Iowa Ct. App. 2013) (one-homicide rule violation is an illegal sentence that cannot be waived by plea)
State v. Woody, 613 N.W.2d 215 (Iowa 2000) (plea agreements cannot be used to uphold illegal sentences)
Young v. United States, 315 U.S. 257 (1942) (courts are not bound by stipulations that would result in maladministration of criminal law)