State of Iowa v. Ken Lorenze Kuhse, 937 N.W.2d 622

On Aug. 20, 2017, V.P. testified Ken Kuhse strangled and repeatedly slammed her; photographs and medical treatment documented multiple abrasions and labored breathing. Kuhse claimed self‑defense to police; he did not testify at trial.
Kuhse was charged with domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury and filed a notice of self‑defense. Trial occurred March 2018; jury convicted and district court sentenced him.
The marshaling instruction (Instruction No. 9) listing elements of assault did not state the State must prove the act was committed "without justification." Separate instructions (Nos. 12–19) explained the justification defense and stated the State must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Both parties addressed self‑defense in closing; the jury asked a clarification question about the marshaling instruction during deliberations.
The Iowa Court of Appeals reversed, finding counsel ineffective for failing to object to the marshaling instruction omission and remanding for a new trial. The Iowa Supreme Court granted further review and vacated the court of appeals decision, affirming the district court conviction.

Issue	State's Argument	Kuhse's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to a marshaling instruction that omitted that the State must prove lack of justification	The instructions read as a whole (including separate justification instructions and reasonable‑doubt language), counsel’s failure to object did not prejudice the outcome	Omission could lead jurors to stop after finding marshaled elements and not apply burden to disprove justification; counsel ineffective	No ineffective assistance: no reasonable probability of a different outcome given the instructions as a whole and the strength of evidence against justification

State v. Delay, 320 N.W.2d 831 (Iowa 1982) (justification is an affirmative defense; court must instruct if supported by substantial evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Harris, 891 N.W.2d 182 (Iowa 2017) (omission of an element from marshaling instruction can support ineffective‑assistance claim; analyze prejudice under Strickland)
State v. Propps, 376 N.W.2d 619 (Iowa 1985) (no prejudice where other instructions supplied missing element)
State v. Douglas, 485 N.W.2d 619 (Iowa 1992) (no ineffective assistance where defense benefit provided through other instructions and evidence undermined claim)
State v. Heacock, 521 N.W.2d 707 (Iowa 1994) (failure to object to marshaling instruction omission not reversible on preserved error absent showing of probable different result)
State v. Fintel, 689 N.W.2d 95 (Iowa 2004) (instructions considered as a whole; other instructions explaining reasonable‑doubt burden can cure potential misstatements)
State v. Ambrose, 861 N.W.2d 550 (Iowa 2015) (prejudice inquiry requires assessing the totality of the evidence and whether error undermines confidence in the verdict)