State of Iowa v. Michael Wayne Holton
17-0253
| Iowa Ct. App. | Jul 19, 2017Background
- Michael Holton pleaded guilty to one count of domestic abuse assault (third or subsequent) under a plea agreement that limited prison exposure and included certain sentencing recommendations.
- The plea form included an initialed line reading “Restitution is ( not ) requested,” but the word “not” was not crossed out or circled; other lines on the form had “not” circled.
- Before sentencing the State filed a statement of pecuniary damages showing the Crime Victim Compensation Program (CVCP) had paid $1,400 and sought restitution to reimburse the CVCP.
- At the plea/sentencing hearing the court warned Holton he would be required to pay any victim restitution; Holton affirmed understanding and waived delay of sentencing.
- Defense counsel objected to including CVCP moving/relocation payments as restitution, requested a restitution hearing to challenge causation, and argued the payments were not emergency relocation expenses.
- The district court concluded Chapter 910 placed CVCP payments within restitution and ordered Holton to reimburse $1,400; Holton appealed arguing the restitution order was erroneous and counsel was ineffective regarding restitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly ordered restitution to CVCP without a restitution hearing on causation | State: CVCP paid victim; statute requires restitution to CVCP for payments it made | Holton: CVCP payments not causally tied to offense (not emergency); requested hearing to contest inclusion | Court: Vacated restitution order and remanded for restitution hearing on causation (State conceded hearing required) |
| Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to inform Holton he faced restitution risk in plea process | State: Record does not show prejudice from counsel’s alleged breach | Holton: Counsel failed to advise him he risked restitution | Court: Preserved claim for postconviction relief because record insufficient to show Holton would have rejected plea and gone to trial (no prejudice shown on direct appeal) |
| Whether the plea colloquy/plea form waived challenge to restitution | State: Court noted plea colloquy informed defendant restitution could be ordered | Holton: Plea form ambiguous and not clear notice of restitution risk | Court: Plea colloquy alone did not eliminate right to challenge restitution; restitution portion vacated for hearing |
| Whether court had discretion to decline ordering CVCP reimbursement despite CVCP payment | State: Court has limited discretion but CVCP payment generally mandates restitution | Holton: Court could review and refuse if CVCP’s finding was inaccurate | Court: Court agreed it had latitude to assess defendant’s ability to pay but not to avoid a causation hearing; remanded for hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jenkins, 788 N.W.2d 640 (Iowa 2010) (CVCP payments require opportunity to challenge causal connection for restitution)
- State v. Lopez, 872 N.W.2d 159 (Iowa 2015) (standards for addressing ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal)
- State v. Carroll, 767 N.W.2d 638 (Iowa 2009) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance in guilty-plea context)
- State v. Bearse, 748 N.W.2d 211 (Iowa 2008) (preserving ineffective-assistance claims for postconviction relief when record insufficient)