Jonathan Lee Brewer Jr., Applicant-Appellant v. State of Iowa, 15-0144

Background

Brewer forcibly entered Moore’s apartment on Feb 13, 2011, poured gasoline on Tyrone Cameron and threw a gas can at Henry Palmer; Palmer identified Brewer at trial and a jury convicted him of first-degree burglary.
Moore did not testify at trial; afterward she provided an affidavit recanting identification, but the trial court denied a new trial and this court affirmed on direct appeal.
Brewer filed a postconviction-relief (PCR) application alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and prosecutorial error (improper closing remarks); the PCR court denied relief.
On appeal from the PCR denial, the court reviewed ineffective-assistance claims de novo under the Strickland standard and addressed two issues in detail: (1) failure to object to the burglary marshalling instruction and (2) failure to object to prosecutor’s closing comments.
Court held many complaints were reasonable trial/appellate strategy or nonprejudicial given overwhelming evidence (eyewitness ID, corroborating testimony), and Brewer failed to show prejudice from any deficiencies.

Issues

Issue	Brewer's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Jury instruction marshalling burglary (failure to specify which felony/theft/assault)	Trial counsel ineffective for not objecting; instruction left jury without definition of specific intended felony	Instructional error exists but any omission was harmless because evidence showed intent to commit assault	Court: No prejudice; counsel not shown ineffective on this point; conviction stands
Prosecutor’s closing remarks (vouching, personal opinion)	Prosecutor vouched for witness credibility and injected personal opinion; counsel ineffective for not objecting; appellate counsel ineffective for not raising on appeal	Remarks were isolated; not pervasive; outweighed by strong State evidence and not prejudicial	Court: Any error was not prejudicial; counsel’s decisions reasonable; no ineffective assistance
Trial counsel’s investigation and impeachment of witnesses	Counsel failed to adequately investigate and impeach (e.g., Thompson’s criminal history)	Counsel conducted reasonable investigation; failure to impeach was not shown to be prejudicial given other strong evidence	Court: Claims involve reasonable strategy or lack prejudice; denied
Appellate counsel’s issue selection	Appellate counsel should have raised additional errors (prosecutorial error, instruction) on direct appeal	Counsel reasonably exercised discretion to raise meritorious issues; no duty to raise nonmeritorious claims	Court: No ineffective assistance of appellate counsel because underlying claims lacked merit or prejudice

Key Cases Cited

State v. Mesch, 574 N.W.2d 10 (Iowa 1997) (trial court must specify which felony the State alleges in burglary instruction and instruct on its elements)
State v. Oetken, 613 N.W.2d 679 (Iowa 2000) (instructional error not reversible when evidence clearly shows particular intent and no prejudice)
Ledezma v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134 (Iowa 2001) (standards for PCR and counsel’s duty to investigate/reasonable strategic decisions)
Nguyen v. State, 878 N.W.2d 744 (Iowa 2016) (ineffective-assistance claims reviewed de novo; two-prong test)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (benchmark two-pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Taylor, 689 N.W.2d 116 (Iowa 2004) (no duty to raise meritless issues on appeal)
State v. Clay, 824 N.W.2d 488 (Iowa 2012) (strength of evidence can cure failure to object to misstated law where evidence supports verdict)
State v. Schlitter, 881 N.W.2d 380 (Iowa 2016) (distinguishing prosecutorial misconduct from prosecutorial error; review framework)
State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2003) (factors for evaluating prejudicial effect of prosecutorial statements)
State v. Kellogg, 542 N.W.2d 514 (Iowa 1996) (scope of jury instructions and when definitions are required)
Henderson v. Scurr, 313 N.W.2d 522 (Iowa 1981) (trial court’s duty to instruct on pertinent legal issues)