State of Iowa v. Allen Bradley Clay, 2012 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 110

Clay was convicted of second-degree burglary, operating a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent, and operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, second offense.
On appeal, Clay challenged the sufficiency of the burglary evidence and raised three ineffectiveness-of-counsel claims.
Key factual context included the nighttime theft of Overman’s Blazer, discovery of a bicycle belonging to Clay, and surrounding investigative steps by law enforcement.
A text message from Clay’s girlfriend and a prior statement from Clay’s sister placed Clay near the vehicle and contributed to the case evidence.
The court of appeals affirmed the burglary conviction and partially addressed counsel claims; the supreme court granted further review.
The supreme court ultimately preserved the burglary sufficiency ruling, vacated the appellate ruling on ineffectiveness claims, and remanded for postconviction relief proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was trial counsel ineffective for failing to object to the State’s rebuttal on theft intent?	Clay claims the law was misstated by prosecutor	Clay contends counsel should have objected to erroneous law instruction	Yes; trial counsel ineffective; need postconviction relief
Did admission of four hearsay statements affect prejudice under Strickland?	Clay argues hearsay without confrontation harmed defense	Clay asserts trial counsel failed to object to hearsay and Crawford issues	Premature on direct appeal; must develop record in postconviction relief
Was counsel ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor’s rebuttal about non-testifying witnesses?	Clay asserts prejudicial comment about non-testifying witnesses	Clay contends failure to object was ineffective assistance	Vacated as to prejudice; requires postconviction relief analysis

State v. Schminkey, 597 N.W.2d 785 (Iowa 1999) (defines intent-to-deprive for theft of an automobile)
State v. Morris, 677 N.W.2d 787 (Iowa 2004) (reaffirms Schminkey interpretation)
State v. Mayes, 286 N.W.2d 387 (Iowa 1979) (prosecutor cannot instruct the jury on the law)
State v. Schrier, 347 N.W.2d 657 (Iowa 1984) (cumulate consideration of multiple ineffective-assistance claims)
State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2003) (cumulative prejudice and Strickland prejudice framework)
State v. Wills, 696 N.W.2d 20 (Iowa 2005) (preference for postconviction development for claims of ineffectiveness)
State v. Vance, 790 N.W.2d 775 (Iowa 2010) (ethical standards inform ineffective-assistance evaluation)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-pronged test for ineffective assistance)