State of Iowa v. Alphonze Emanuel, 968 N.W.2d 919

Emanuel pled guilty to a felony; sentencing was continued from March 30 to April 13 so he could complete a substance-abuse evaluation.
Iowa Supreme Court supervisory orders during the COVID-19 pandemic (Mar. 14 and Apr. 2, 2020) authorized virtual sentencing with a defendant waiver (written or on the record).
The district court ordered the sheriff to make Emanuel available via audiovisual closed-circuit TV; the April 13 sentencing was conducted with Emanuel appearing from the jail and counsel/state via ICN.
The judge advised Emanuel of his right to appear in person, explained the court’s use of audiovisual means due to COVID-19, and asked whether Emanuel was okay proceeding that way; Emanuel responded, “Yes.”
Emanuel was given an opportunity for allocution, was sentenced, and appealed, arguing his waiver of in-person presence was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent and was coerced by the court’s prior order.

Issue	State's Argument	Emanuel's Argument	Held
Whether Emanuel validly waived his right to be personally present at sentencing	Waiver was valid because the court informed Emanuel of his right to appear and obtained an on-the-record consent to proceed virtually	Waiver was not knowing/voluntary; was coerced by the court’s preemptive order and the court failed to tell him the hearing could be continued for an in-person sentencing	Waiver was knowing, intentional, and unambiguous; no coercion shown; court did not abuse discretion; sentence affirmed

State v. Witham, 583 N.W.2d 677 (Iowa 1998) (appellate review of sentencing requires a showing of abuse of discretion or a procedural defect)
State v. Webb, 516 N.W.2d 824 (Iowa 1994) (defendant has right to be present at sentencing but may waive that right)
State v. Rogerson, 855 N.W.2d 495 (Iowa 2014) (defining ICN as a two-way videoconferencing system)
State v. Damme, 944 N.W.2d 98 (Iowa 2020) (standard for appellate jurisdiction and good cause to appeal sentencing issues)
In re A.H., 950 N.W.2d 27 (Iowa Ct. App. 2020) (contextual discussion of COVID-19 pandemic effects on court operations)