State of Iowa v. Daniel Joseph Kane, 16-0281

Daniel Joseph Kane pled guilty in February 2016 to forgery (presenting a stolen check) and possession of a controlled substance (Vicodin/hydrocodone) and was sentenced to two consecutive five-year terms, concurrent with other cases per a plea agreement.
Minutes of testimony showed a burglary of a car and theft of a checkbook; three checks were written without consent, and surveillance captured Kane writing and presenting one check at a store.
Kane admitted at the plea hearing he presented a check that was not his and that he did not know the account owners or have their permission; he also admitted possessing "a couple of Vicodin pills" when arrested.
Kane later challenged his guilty plea, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel because there was an inadequate factual basis for the elements of forgery (intent) and possession (identification of the substance).
The district court accepted Kane’s plea; on appeal the court reviewed de novo whether counsel breached an essential duty and whether prejudice resulted, and whether the record contained a sufficient factual basis for the pleas.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for allowing a guilty plea to forgery absent a factual basis for intent	State argued minutes and Kane’s admissions supplied facts and reasonable inferences supporting intent to defraud	Kane argued his statement that he "kind of thought" the check belonged to someone else showed lack of intent to defraud	Counsel not ineffective; minutes plus admissions and surveillance provided sufficient factual basis for intent
Whether counsel was ineffective for allowing a guilty plea to possession absent proof the pills were controlled substances	State relied on Kane’s admission and officers’ identification of the pills; brand/generic equivalence (Vicodin = hydrocodone + acetaminophen) supports charge	Kane argued no chemical analysis and a possible mismatch between his admission (Vicodin/hydrocodone) and the charged formulation (acetaminophen and hydrocodone bitartrate)	Counsel not ineffective; Kane’s admission and officers’ ID supplied factual basis and Vicodin is hydrocodone/acetaminophen as charged

Ortiz v. State, 789 N.W.2d 761 (Iowa 2010) (standard of de novo review for ineffective-assistance claims challenging plea)
Tompkins v. State, 859 N.W.2d 631 (Iowa 2015) (two-part Strickland-like test: duty and prejudice)
Velez v. State, 829 N.W.2d 572 (Iowa 2013) (requirement and sources for a factual basis supporting a guilty plea)
Rhoades v. State, 848 N.W.2d 22 (Iowa 2014) (record need only demonstrate facts supporting the elements of the offense)
Schminkey v. State, 597 N.W.2d 785 (Iowa 1999) (facts and reasonable inferences can establish intent)
Finney v. State, 834 N.W.2d 46 (Iowa 2013) (minutes of testimony can provide sufficient evidence from which a jury could infer requisite intent)
Dudley v. State, 766 N.W.2d 606 (Iowa 2009) (counsel has no duty to raise meritless issues)