State of Iowa v. Bruce Eric Johnson, 16-0517

Background

Incident in January 2015: Bruce Johnson struck his stepfather in the face in the kitchen after a family dispute; Johnson admitted the punch but claimed it was a reflex/accident and that his stepfather had been yelling and raised his hands.
Johnson’s mother testified she tried to restrain him and was shoved against a counter; Johnson was acquitted as to the mother but convicted for assault causing bodily injury to the stepfather.
Jury was instructed with a marshalling instruction that described elements for assault causing bodily injury and stated if only elements 1 and 2 were met, the jury could convict of simple assault; the verdict form also included simple assault.
The court gave a separate “Justification” instruction but did not incorporate lack-of-justification into the assault marshalling instruction.
Johnson appealed alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to secure various jury instructions (lesser-included, limiting on impeachment, linking justification to assault, specific-intent wording, and a cautionary instruction) and claimed cumulative prejudice.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Johnson)	Held
1. Lesser-included offense instruction	Court gave marshalling instruction and verdict form allowed simple assault finding; no error	Counsel should have requested explicit lesser-included instruction	No breach/prejudice — instruction and verdict form adequate; claim fails
2. Limiting instruction for impeachment (prior conviction)	Any error was harmless; isolated reference and defense did not dispute the punch	Counsel should have requested limiting instruction when prior conviction was mentioned	No prejudice shown; isolated reference unlikely to change outcome
3. Connection between justification instruction and assault marshalling instruction	Even if omitted, record does not generate a legitimate justification question because Johnson claimed a reflex (accident), not defensive use of force	Failure to link allowed conviction without considering justification	No prejudice: evidence (and Johnson’s own admissions) did not generate a justification question; trial outcome would not likely differ
4. Specific-intent wording (“meant to” vs “intended to”)	Wording difference is semantic only; both convey purpose/intent	“Meant to” is inferior and may understate specific intent requirement	No breach/prejudice: court finds no meaningful distinction between terms
5. Cautionary instruction about judge’s neutrality	Trial transcript showed even-handed judge; no specific conduct to cure	Counsel should have requested a cautionary instruction to guard against judicial influence	No breach/prejudice: speculative, no record showing need; claim fails

Key Cases Cited

State v. Thorndike, 860 N.W.2d 316 (Iowa 2015) (standard for ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal)
Dempsey v. State, 860 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2015) (prejudice element analysis in ineffective-assistance claims)
State v. Maxwell, 743 N.W.2d 185 (Iowa 2008) (standard for proving prejudice under Strickland)
State v. Fountain, 786 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 2010) (ineffective-assistance claims as exception to waiver for jury-instruction objections)
State v. Richards, 879 N.W.2d 140 (Iowa 2016) (proving lack of justification by showing defendant initiated the incident)
State v. Delay, 320 N.W.2d 831 (Iowa 1982) (self-defense requires the act be defensive, not accidental)
State v. Thornton, 498 N.W.2d 670 (Iowa 1993) (alternative courses of action can negate justification)
State v. Clay, 824 N.W.2d 488 (Iowa 2012) (cumulative effect of ineffective-assistance claims)