State of Iowa v. Earl A. Griffin, 16-0877

Earl Griffin pleaded guilty to possession with intent to deliver marijuana; a separate charge for failure to affix a drug tax stamp was dismissed under the plea agreement. The State sought habitual-offender enhancement.
The district court ordered a presentence investigation (PSI) and later held a sentencing hearing where Griffin sought probation and the State recommended confinement per the PSI.
At sentencing Griffin made only limited corrections to the PSI (one child deceased; reengaged in treatment) and did not dispute other PSI statements that attributed continued marijuana use and parole problems to him.
The PSI included statements from Griffin’s parole officer recounting arrests, supervision failures, and other incidents, some of which involved dismissed or unproven charges; it also recommended confinement, noting prior supervision had not deterred Griffin.
Griffin argued on appeal the district court improperly relied on unproven crimes and parole-office statements when imposing a prison sentence (up to 15 years) as an habitual offender.
The Court of Appeals reviewed for correction of errors at law and affirmed, finding the sentencing court did not rely on impermissible factors and could consider admissions and evidence of unsuccessful supervision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the sentencing court relied on unproven or dismissed offenses when imposing confinement	State: The court properly relied on the PSI, Griffin's admissions, and his poor supervision history to justify confinement	Griffin: The court relied on parole-officer statements about "other crimes" that were unproven and thus impermissible to consider	Held: No error — court could consider admissions and facts showing unsuccessful parole; no showing it relied on unproven offenses
Whether the district court abused discretion by considering parole/supervision failures and other PSI factors	State: Supervision failures and PSI recommendation are appropriate sentencing factors to assess rehabilitation risk and public protection	Griffin: Reliance on those PSI/parole statements was improper because they referenced unproven matters	Held: No abuse — past failure on parole and similar programs is a proper factor in deciding probation vs. confinement

State v. Sailer, 587 N.W.2d 756 (Iowa 1998) (sentencing remand standard when court considered improper factors)
State v. Gonzalez, 582 N.W.2d 515 (Iowa 1998) (court may consider defendant's admissions in PSI when sentencing)
State v. Knight, 701 N.W.2d 83 (Iowa 2005) (sentencing factors include defendant's character, propensity to reoffend, and chances for reform)