State of Iowa v. Joshwa Marquette Tanner, 14-1963

Background

On May 24, 2014, J.R. suffered severe facial and cranial injuries (multiple fractures to the jaw, orbit, sinuses, pterygoid processes, nasal bone and three hemorrhagic brain contusions). ER testimony said the injuries posed a substantial risk of death without treatment.
Tanner (J.R.’s boyfriend) admitted he struck J.R. in the face twice in a car, then drove her to the ER; he made inculpatory statements at the hospital ("I did it," "I assaulted her," "I really screwed up").
Tanner testified he did not intend to seriously injure J.R., claiming the assault "happened spur of the moment." He also admitted prior physical incidents with J.R.
The bench trial resulted in convictions for willful injury causing serious injury and domestic abuse assault causing serious injury; sentences ran consecutively (10 years + 2 years). The court ordered payment of $264.50 in court-appointed attorney fees and $251.18 to the Crime Victim Compensation Program, due immediately.
On appeal Tanner challenged (1) sufficiency of the evidence as to intent and the existence of a domestic relationship, and (2) the district court’s imposition of fees without a record determination of his reasonable ability to pay.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there was substantial evidence Tanner had specific intent to cause serious injury (willful-injury)	Evidence of admissions, prior assaults, demonstrated punches, severe injuries, and Tanner’s statements support an inference of specific intent	Tanner said he did not intend to injure J.R. that severely; it was spontaneous and not meant to cause serious harm	Court: Substantial evidence supports finding Tanner acted with specific intent to cause serious injury; conviction affirmed
Whether there was substantial evidence Tanner and J.R. were in a domestic relationship (domestic-abuse charge)	Testimony and Tanner’s statements that they lived together and had a sexual relationship support a domestic relationship	Tanner disputed the characterization	Court: Substantial evidence supports finding they lived together since September 2013; domestic-abuse conviction affirmed
Whether the district court erred by ordering attorney fees and victim-compensation payments without determining Tanner’s ability to pay	Fees for court-appointed counsel and victim-compensation require a court consideration of the defendant’s reasonable ability to pay before ordering restitution	Tanner argued the record lacks a determination of ability to pay and his financial affidavit indicated little or no ability to pay	Court: Sentencing order included a payment plan but record does not show the court considered ability to pay; that portion of sentence vacated and remanded for determination

Key Cases Cited

State v. Thomas, 561 N.W.2d 37 (Iowa 1997) (standard of review for errors at law)
State v. Taylor, 689 N.W.2d 116 (Iowa 2004) (trial court factual findings binding if supported by substantial evidence)
State v. Torres, 495 N.W.2d 678 (Iowa 1993) (definition of substantial evidence beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Sutton, 636 N.W.2d 107 (Iowa 2001) (review evidence in light most favorable to State)
NevadaCare, Inc. v. Dep’t of Human Servs., 783 N.W.2d 459 (Iowa 2010) (abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Hopkins, 860 N.W.2d 550 (Iowa 2015) (abuse of discretion explained)
State v. Sinclair, 622 N.W.2d 772 (Iowa Ct. App. 2001) (intent usually proven circumstantially)
State v. Schminkey, 597 N.W.2d 785 (Iowa 1999) (facts and circumstances may show intent)
State v. Kurtz, 878 N.W.2d 469 (Iowa Ct. App. 2016) (restitution plan in sentencing order can be appealed; ability-to-pay requirement for certain restitution)
Goodrich v. State, 608 N.W.2d 774 (Iowa 2000) (court must determine defendant’s ability to pay before ordering restitution under Iowa Code § 910.2)
State v. Wagner, 484 N.W.2d 212 (Iowa Ct. App. 1992) (distinguishing restitution to victims and payments requiring consideration of ability to pay)
State v. Van Hoff, 415 N.W.2d 647 (Iowa 1987) (burden to show court failed to exercise or abused discretion in restitution orders)
State v. Lathrop, 781 N.W.2d 288 (Iowa 2010) (relaxed preservation rules for sentencing errors)