State of Iowa v. Justin Eugene Merchant, 16-1191

Background

Justin Merchant pled guilty to delivery of methamphetamine under a plea agreement calling for immediate release on pretrial supervision and the State’s recommendation of a suspended sentence with five years’ probation, conditioned on no new charges while on supervision.
Merchant’s probation officer reported violations (missed appointment, arrest for disorderly conduct, admitted meth use); pretrial release was revoked and Merchant was re-incarcerated.
At a May 9 bond review hearing (Merchant present), the State informed the court it might withdraw its probation recommendation because Merchant had been charged with disorderly conduct in violation of the plea terms.
Merchant failed to appear for the scheduled sentencing dates, generating a warrant and later an additional charge of failure to appear (class D felony) while on supervised release.
At the July 5 sentencing hearing the State withdrew its agreed probation recommendation based on the new charges; the court acknowledged it could not consider an unproven charge but found the State was entitled to withdraw its recommendation under the plea agreement and sentenced Merchant to incarceration up to ten years.
Merchant appealed, arguing the court improperly considered the new charge, his due process rights were violated by the State’s change in recommendation, and he received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court improperly considered an unproven new charge at sentencing	State: court did not rely on the unproven charge to impose sentence; it relied on plea-agreement consequence (withdrawal of recommendation)	Merchant: court considered the new failure-to-appear charge when sentencing	Held: No error — court disavowed considering the charge; could consider State’s changed recommendation and Merchant’s allocution admitting the conduct
Whether Merchant’s due process rights were violated by State changing its recommendation at sentencing	State: change was permitted by plea agreement and Merchant had notice that new charges could void recommendation	Merchant: lacked notice of the failure-to-appear charge and could not defend against it	Held: No due process violation — Merchant previously was informed plea could be withdrawn upon new charges and knew of disorderly-conduct charge before sentencing
Whether counsel was ineffective for not requesting continuance or advising re: admission of new charge	State: record inadequate to show prejudice from counsel’s conduct	Merchant: counsel’s failures prejudiced sentencing outcome	Held: Claims preserved for postconviction relief because record is inadequate to resolve prejudice on direct appeal
Whether general failures of counsel warrant reversal on direct appeal	State: defendant must show different outcome would have occurred	Merchant: asserted general incompetence	Held: Not resolved on direct appeal; preserved for postconviction proceedings

Key Cases Cited

State v. Formaro, 638 N.W.2d 720 (Iowa 2002) (standard for reviewing criminal sentence)
State v. Brown, 656 N.W.2d 355 (Iowa 2003) (de novo review for due process claims)
State v. Straw, 709 N.W.2d 128 (Iowa 2006) (de novo review for ineffective-assistance claims)
State v. Witham, 583 N.W.2d 677 (Iowa 1998) (limits on considering unproven offenses at sentencing)
State v. Longo, 608 N.W.2d 471 (Iowa 2000) (sufficiency of record for sentencing reliance on alleged conduct)
State v. Grandberry, 619 N.W.2d 399 (Iowa 2000) (lower proof standard at sentencing)
Jasper v. State, 477 N.W.2d 852 (Iowa 1991) (court’s statement excluding evidence can cure consideration of improper matter)
State v. Matheson, 684 N.W.2d 243 (Iowa 2004) (inadvertent exposure to improper evidence not always fatal if court disavows it)
State v. Foy, 574 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa 1998) (plea challenge for lack of notice only when defendant not apprised of consequences)
Mabry v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 504 (U.S. 1984) (due process limits on plea challenges)
State v. Fannon, 799 N.W.2d 515 (Iowa 2011) (prejudice requirement for ineffective-assistance claims at sentencing)
State v. Bearse, 748 N.W.2d 211 (Iowa 2006) (burden to prove prejudice from counsel’s performance)
State v. Johnson, 784 N.W.2d 192 (Iowa 2010) (preserve ineffective-assistance claims for postconviction relief if record inadequate)