790 N.W.2d 104
Iowa2010Background
- Mead was convicted in 1986 of first-degree burglary and two counts of third-degree sexual abuse; anticipated release date was October 1, 2008.
- State filed an SVP petition on September 24, 2008 with a statement of probable cause after Dr. Canton Roberts preliminarily evaluated Mead.
- Probable cause hearing on September 29, 2008 found probable cause to believe Mead is an SVP; case set for trial and Mead evaluated for SVP.
- Mead challenged Roberts’s interview as violating his right to counsel; the district court suppressed the interview evidence and vacated the initial probable cause finding.
- State filed an amended petition with Dr. Amy Phenix’s opinion; court again found probable cause and set for jury trial; Mead sought discretionary review.
- Court held initial probable cause finding was supported by sufficient evidence and vacating it was error; case remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority for a second probable cause hearing | Mead argues no statutory basis for second hearing. | State contends the initial finding was effectively vacated and second hearing allowed. | Second hearing not necessary; but reversal on vacating initial probable cause. |
| Roberts's interview and 229A.5A rights | Mead's statutory right to counsel was violated by Roberts's interview. | Roberts was investigative personnel; 229A.5A applies to the attorney general, not Roberts. | Roberts violated 229A.5A; interview evidence inadmissible. |
| Effect of striking the interview on probable cause | Even without interview, there was insufficient evidence for probable cause. | The petition contained sufficient evidence of SVP even excluding the interview. | Sufficient evidence existed to establish probable cause even after excluding the interview. |
| Vacating the initial probable cause finding | District court properly vacated due to suppressed interview evidence. | District court erred in vacating; initial probable cause remains valid. | District court erred in vacating; initial probable cause supported continued detention; remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Detention of Fowler, 784 N.W.2d 184 (Iowa 2010) (procedural protections in SVP act; informs right to counsel)
- State v. Moorehead, 699 N.W.2d 667 (Iowa 2005) (evidence suppression when statutory right to counsel violated)
- Cooley v. Superior Court, 57 P.3d 654 (Cal. 2002) (probable cause hearing test is preliminary; not determinative of guilt/commitment)
- State v. Jackson, 661 S.E.2d 810 (Va. 2008) (probable cause standard in SVP-like proceedings; analogous to preliminary hearing)