State of Iowa v. Elmer Paul Scheckel, 15-1680

In April 2013 Scheckel sent written communications to Magistrate Steven Ristvedt and Officer Brian Brinkema after a magistrate-court conviction for traffic offenses; the letters threatened to place liens and demanded payment of $87,241.
The State charged Scheckel with aggravated-misdemeanor interference with judicial acts (Iowa Code §720.7) and tampering with a witness (Iowa Code §720.4).
After initial pro se appearances, Scheckel proceeded pro se at a first jury trial, was convicted, then received a new trial because the court’s earlier Faretta colloquy was inadequate.
Standby counsel was appointed; later Scheckel elevated standby counsel Laura Gavigan to full counsel, waived a jury, and stipulated to minutes of evidence.
Following the stipulated bench trial, the district court convicted Scheckel; he was sentenced to 8 days in jail and appealed, raising sufficiency of the evidence, a claimed defective waiver of counsel, and pro se jurisdictional/grand-jury/speedy-trial complaints.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency — interference with judicial acts	Evidence shows letter to magistrate threatened lien, listed home address, caused alarm and thus met harassment and intent elements	Letter was legitimate criticism; magistrates must tolerate upset litigants; no intent to intimidate	Affirmed — substantial evidence supported harassment, intent, lack of legitimate purpose, and likelihood to cause alarm
Sufficiency — tampering with witness	Letter to officer after testimony threatened retaliation, listed personal address, and intimidated the witness	Letter was protected/legitimate speech; comparable to protected complaints in other cases	Affirmed — substantial evidence showed harassment, intent to intimidate, and no legitimate purpose
Waiver of counsel / Faretta colloquy	Court previously appointed standby counsel and Scheckel later elevated her to lead counsel, so no denial of Sixth Amendment right	Initial Faretta colloquy was inadequate; this defective waiver required a new trial	Affirmed — no relief because Scheckel was represented by counsel at the trial that produced these convictions; elevation of standby counsel cured any prior Faretta defect
One-year speedy-trial rule	State: good cause for delay (unavailable key witness); some delay attributable to defendant (venue motion); no prejudice	Scheckel: trial exceeded one-year limit from arraignment	Affirmed — court properly found good cause, defendant-attributable delay, and no prejudice

State v. Howse, 875 N.W.2d 684 (Iowa 2016) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Martin, 608 N.W.2d 445 (Iowa 2000) (Faretta standards and court obligations for waiver of counsel)
State v. Evans, 672 N.W.2d 328 (Iowa 2003) (intent may be inferred from consequences of actions)
State v. Fratzke, 446 N.W.2d 781 (Iowa 1989) (distinct facts where letter was protected political speech)
State v. Baker, 688 N.W.2d 250 (Iowa 2004) (distinguishing protected speech from harassing communications directed at witnesses/jurors)
United States v. Swinney, 970 F.2d 494 (8th Cir. 1992) (defendant may elevate standby counsel to lead counsel, waiving Faretta rights)