State of Iowa v. Richard Warren Fannon
2011 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 36
| Iowa | 2011Background
- Fannon was charged with two counts of sexual abuse in the second degree of a minor; he and the State reached a plea agreement to reduce to sexual abuse in the third degree with no sentencing recommendation.
- Trial information was amended to reflect the plea agreement, and Fannon pled guilty to both counts.
- At sentencing, the State, represented by a different prosecutor, recommended consecutive terms totaling twenty years, despite the plea agreement’s silence on this and the defense’s position for concurrent terms.
- Defense counsel did not withdraw the guilty pleas, did not request a specific performance before a different judge, and did not consult with Fannon prior to the sentencing hearing.
- The court ordered consecutive sentences based on the presentence report and Fannon’s criminal history; Fannon appealed claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to object to the breach of the plea agreement.
- The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed, holding no breach or prejudice; the Iowa Supreme Court granted review to address whether failure to object constitutes ineffective assistance and what remedy is appropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the State breach the plea agreement at sentencing? | Fannon | Fannon | Yes; breach occurred and could not be cured by withdrawal of remarks. |
| Did defense counsel fail to perform an essential duty by not objecting? | Fannon | Fannon | Yes; counsel failed to object and protect the bargain. |
| Was there prejudice from the breach requiring relief? | Fannon | Fannon | Yes; prejudice established because defendant was denied the benefit of the plea. |
| What remedy best serves justice for a breached plea? | Fannon | Fannon | Remand for resentencing before a new judge and vacate sentences to give effect to the plea. |
Key Cases Cited
- Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (U.S. Supreme Court 1971) (breach of plea bargain requires reversal or remedy to honor the agreement)
- Bearse, 748 N.W.2d 211 (Iowa 2008) (record adequate for direct review; breach cannot be cured by withdrawal of remarks)
- Horness, 600 N.W.2d 294 (Iowa 1999) (objective analysis of prejudice and remedy for plea-bargain breach)
- Kuchenreuther, 218 N.W.2d 621 (Iowa 1974) (necessity of fair plea negotiations and breach consequences)
- Bergmann, 600 N.W.2d 311 (Iowa 1999) (injury from failure to object to breach and impact on sentence)