State of Iowa v. Erin Macke
18-0839
| Iowa | Sep 13, 2019Background
- Erin Macke pleaded Alford to four counts of child endangerment after her children were found home alone with an unsecured firearm; a separate gun count was to be dismissed.
- Defense counsel’s written petition and his on-the-record recitation at the plea hearing stated the parties had a "joint recommendation of deferred judgment and probation;" the prosecutor did not object on the record.
- A contemporaneous written court order (not read to Macke in court) conflicted, stating the State reserved its sentencing recommendation until after the PSI.
- At sentencing the State recommended a two-year suspended prison sentence (not a deferred judgment); defense counsel did not object and the court followed the State’s recommendation.
- Macke appealed, arguing the State breached the plea agreement and prior counsel was ineffective for failing to object; the court of appeals affirmed convictions but preserved ineffective-assistance claims for PCR. While the appeal was pending, the legislature amended Iowa Code §§ 814.6 and 814.7 (Senate File 589), restricting appeals after guilty pleas and channeling ineffective-assistance claims to PCR proceedings, effective July 1, 2019.
- The Iowa Supreme Court held the 2019 amendments do not apply to appeals from judgments entered before July 1, 2019, found the State breached the plea agreement, ruled defense counsel ineffective for failing to object, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing before a different judge with the prosecutor required to honor the plea agreement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2019 amendments to Iowa Code §§ 814.6/814.7 apply to appeals from judgments entered before July 1, 2019 | Macke: pre-amendment statutes govern; amendments are not retroactive | State: amendments are jurisdiction‑stripping and should govern pending appeals decided after July 1, 2019 | Held: James v. State controls; amendments do not apply to appeals from judgments entered before July 1, 2019 (no clear retroactive language) |
| Whether the plea agreement included a joint recommendation for deferred judgment | Macke: plea petition and on‑record recitation by defense counsel established a joint recommendation; prosecutor’s silence amounted to acceptance | State: written order reserved the State’s recommendation; the record is unclear | Held: in‑court recitation controls; prosecutor’s silence inferred acceptance; plea term included joint recommendation for deferred judgment |
| Whether the State breached the plea agreement by recommending a suspended sentence at sentencing | Macke: yes—State breached by recommending a different sentence | State: no breach or ambiguity as to agreement | Held: State breached the plea agreement by recommending a suspended sentence rather than jointly recommending a deferred judgment |
| Whether defense counsel’s failure to object at sentencing constituted ineffective assistance and what remedy is appropriate | Macke: original counsel was ineffective; prejudice presumed; remedy is resentencing with prosecutor bound to plea | State: any error was harmless or record insufficient; preserve for PCR | Held: counsel ineffective for failing to object; prejudice presumed; conviction affirmed but sentence vacated and case remanded for resentencing before a different judge with State to honor plea agreement |
Key Cases Cited
- James v. State, 479 N.W.2d 287 (Iowa 1991) (statutes governing appeals are those in effect when the judgment appealed from was rendered)
- Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244 (1994) (presumption against retroactive application of statutes unless Congress clearly indicates otherwise)
- Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006) (jurisdiction‑stripping provisions do not automatically apply to pending cases; normal construction rules apply)
- Hannan v. State, 732 N.W.2d 45 (Iowa 2007) (statutory enactment creating a new remedy may apply retroactively to later proceedings)
- Loye v. State, 670 N.W.2d 141 (Iowa 2003) (in‑court recitation of plea agreement controls; written plea agreement cannot substitute for on‑the‑record colloquy)
- Lopez v. State, 872 N.W.2d 159 (Iowa 2015) (standard for reviewing ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal; presumption of prejudice where counsel fails to object to plea‑agreement breach)
- Bearse v. State, 748 N.W.2d 211 (Iowa 2008) (prosecutors and courts must strictly adhere to plea‑agreement promises)