State of Iowa v. Adam Lee Hopper, 15-1855

On March 8, 2015, Adam Hopper allegedly fired a gun inside the home he shared with his fiancée during an altercation; bullet casings were later found throughout the house.
Hopper was charged with intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent (Iowa Code § 708.6) and convicted by a jury of the lesser-included offense, a class D felony.
The district court sentenced Hopper to an indeterminate term (up to five years), ordered $286 in victim restitution, and assessed costs and fees; the fine was suspended.
At trial, Hopper’s counsel moved for judgment of acquittal on the element of intent but did not specifically preserve sufficiency error as to whether the firearm was discharged "at, into, or in" the occupied building.
On appeal Hopper argued ineffective assistance for failing to preserve the sufficiency challenge to that element, and separately argued the court imposed an illegal restitution payment sequence contrary to Iowa Code § 910.2(1).
The State filed court records showing Hopper has paid restitution; the court took judicial notice and held the sentencing claim moot.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence re: discharge "at, into, or in" occupied building / ineffective assistance	State: Evidence (fiancée testimony, casings in house, shots fired inside/through door) suffices to show discharge in house and reasonable apprehension	Hopper: Counsel failed to preserve and therefore effectively challenge sufficiency as to the "at/into/in" element; evidence does not show firing at/into/in house or imperiling occupants	Court: Viewing evidence in State's favor, substantial evidence supports discharge in the house and reasonable apprehension; Hopper not prejudiced by counsel’s alleged omission, so no ineffective assistance; conviction affirmed
Alleged illegal sentencing for restitution sequencing	State: Sentence valid; moreover, restitution paid in full so issue moot	Hopper: District court set payment sequence contrary to Iowa Code § 910.2(1), rendering sentence illegal	Court: Took judicial notice of Iowa Courts Online showing zero balance; claim is moot and not considered further; sentencing challenge dismissed

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance standard)
Thorndike v. State, 860 N.W.2d 316 (Iowa 2015) (standard for ineffective-assistance review)
Meyers v. State, 799 N.W.2d 132 (Iowa 2011) (sufficiency-of-the-evidence standard)
Ross v. State, 845 N.W.2d 692 (Iowa 2014) (discussing required manner of firing to imperil occupants)
Hochmuth v. State, 585 N.W.2d 234 (Iowa 1998) (counsel need not pursue meritless issues)
Hagen v. State, 840 N.W.2d 140 (Iowa 2013) (standard for reviewing restitution orders)
State v. Washington, 832 N.W.2d 650 (Iowa 2013) (permitting judicial notice of court records on appeal)