State of Iowa v. Johnnathan Monroe Frencher, 873 N.W.2d 281

Frencher was charged with possession with intent to deliver marijuana and a separate concealed-weapon charge; he agreed to plead guilty to the possession charge and the State agreed to dismiss the weapons charge.
Plea agreement: Frencher would plead guilty without sentencing enhancement and the parties would jointly recommend a suspended sentence with probation.
At sentencing the prosecutor verbally recommended a "suspended sentence with probation," but also discussed negative information from the PSI and Frencher’s criminal history while urging that Frencher could succeed on probation.
The district court initially granted a deferred judgment, placed Frencher on probation, and ordered placement at Fort Des Moines; Frencher later moved to correct an illegal sentence and the court vacated the deferred judgment and entered a conviction with a suspended five-year sentence and an order for placement at Fort Des Moines.
Frencher appealed, arguing plea counsel was ineffective for failing to object to an alleged State breach of the plea agreement (the prosecutor’s statements at sentencing undercutting the agreed recommendation).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State breached the plea agreement at sentencing	State: prosecutor complied by recommending the agreed suspended sentence and provided context for that recommendation	Frencher: prosecutor’s emphasis on negative PSI/criminal history effectively undercut the recommendation and breached the agreement	No breach; prosecutor advocated for probation and did not express material reservations
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to alleged breach	State: no breach, so no duty to object	Frencher: counsel should have objected to protect plea benefits	Counsel not ineffective because there was no breach and therefore no duty to object
Standard for assessing plea-breach claims	State: apply de novo review and require showing of material reservation that deprives defendant of bargain	Frencher: same standard but argued prosecutor’s remarks met it	Court applied de novo review; breach requires more than context-setting remarks—must show material reservation contrary to the plea’s spirit
Prejudice requirement for ineffective-assistance claim	State: defendant must show outcome would differ (withdraw plea or resentencing)	Frencher: alleged breach tainted sentencing outcome	Prejudice not shown because no breach; therefore claim fails

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes performance and prejudice test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Straw, 709 N.W.2d 128 (Iowa 2006) (ineffective-assistance standard and de novo review guidance)
State v. Bearse, 748 N.W.2d 211 (Iowa 2008) (prosecutor must present promised recommendation with approval and not inject material reservations)
State v. Fannon, 799 N.W.2d 515 (Iowa 2011) (prejudice for plea-breach claims includes entitlement to withdraw plea or resentencing)
State v. Horness, 600 N.W.2d 294 (Iowa 1999) (State must comply with spirit of plea recommendation; alternative recommendations can constitute breach)
State v. Mulder, 313 N.W.2d 885 (Iowa 1981) (ineffective-assistance claims ordinarily preserved for postconviction relief)
State v. Johnson, 784 N.W.2d 192 (Iowa 2010) (when record sufficient, ineffective-assistance claims may be resolved on direct appeal)
United States v. Cachucha, 484 F.3d 1266 (10th Cir. 2007) (prosecutor should not inject material reservations about a promised recommendation)
State v. Carillo, 597 N.W.2d 497 (Iowa 1999) (prejudice may be shown by right to withdraw plea or resentencing)