State of Iowa v. Brett Aaron Hauck, 16-0858

Brett Hauck pleaded guilty to assault causing bodily injury or mental illness after initially being charged with assault with intent to commit sexual abuse; the State agreed to a deferred judgment plea.
Hauck’s written plea asked the court to accept the minutes of testimony only as a factual basis; the written plea admitted only that he made physical contact that was insulting or offensive and caused depression/anxiety.
Minutes of testimony contained two conflicting versions: the victim alleged explicit sexual touching of the groin/clitoris; Hauck denied that and said he poked her stomach.
The district court ordered a sex offender evaluation, relied on that evaluation’s recommendation, and as part of the deferred judgment placed Hauck on probation and required sex offender treatment.
Hauck sought discretionary review, arguing the court abused its discretion by imposing sex-offender treatment based on unadmitted sexual allegations and that this violated his plea rights; the appellate court granted review and stayed proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court abused its discretion by ordering sex-offender treatment as a probation condition	The State argued the court could rely on the sex-offender evaluation recommendation in setting probation conditions	Hauck argued the court relied on unadmitted, unproven sexual allegations in the minutes of testimony and thus improperly imposed sex-offender treatment	The court held the sentencing court improperly relied on unadmitted facts and thus abused its discretion; vacated sentence and remanded for resentencing before a different judge
Whether facts in the minutes not necessary to the plea’s factual basis may be considered at sentencing	State implied minutes could inform evaluation and sentencing	Hauck argued portions of the minutes that were not admitted are deemed denied and may not be considered	The court held unproven portions of the minutes are not permissible sentencing considerations and cannot justify treatment conditions

State v. Valin, 724 N.W.2d 440 (Iowa 2006) (probation conditions reviewed for abuse of discretion and must promote rehabilitation or community protection)
State v. Jorgensen, 588 N.W.2d 686 (Iowa 1998) (ordering special probation programs improper when based on unproven allegations)
State v. Gonzalez, 582 N.W.2d 515 (Iowa 1998) (court should consider only minutes admitted to or otherwise established as true for sentencing)
State v. Lovell, 857 N.W.2d 241 (Iowa 2014) (information in minutes not permissible for sentencing if unproven)
State v. Lathrop, 781 N.W.2d 288 (Iowa 2010) (probation conditions must reasonably relate to defendant’s circumstances and statutory goals)
Lamasters v. State, 821 N.W.2d 856 (Iowa 2012) (issues not raised and decided in district court are ordinarily not preserved for appeal)