State Of Iowa Vs. Wayne Samuel Barnes, 2010 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 140

Background

Barnes raised pigs at the Bellcocks' rural Calhoun County acreage under an agreement to return one pig when marketed.
The pigs were abandoned by Barnes in 2006, and the Bellcocks later sold them after Barnes moved to Kansas; no contact followed.
A riding lawn mower stored on the Bellcocks' property was stolen in April 2007, with the shed door obstructed by a tractor and a wall opening used to remove the mower.
Brandi Rex pawned the mower in Ames on April 4, 2007; her signature and fingerprint appeared on pawn records, with Rex claiming Barnes stood by during the sale.
Sayer testified Barnes sought help to steal the mower and later to pawn it; Rex and Sayer described their involvement and the key issue of how the mower was removed.
In January 2008, a jury found Barnes guilty of burglary in the third degree and theft in the second degree, with two prior felonies, and the district court imposed consecutive fifteen-year sentences.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance for not requesting corroboration instruction	Barnes argues Rex and Sayer were accomplices requiring corroboration.	Barnes contends counsel should have requested an accomplice-corroboration instruction.	No reasonable probability of different outcome; affirmation of conviction.
Admission of other bad acts evidence (tire/rim) and ineffectiveness	Elicitation/allowing evidence of prior thefts was prejudicial and improper.	Defense opened the door; elicitation may be strategic and permissible.	Record insufficient for direct resolution; preserve for postconviction relief.
Admission of arson remark about sister	Remark shows motive and is probative evidence.	Counsel should have objected; evidence is inflammatory.	Admissible; remarks were probative of motive and not unfairly prejudicial.
Consecutive sentences—statutory rationale and record	Court failed to provide reasons for consecutive sentencing on the record.	No fault; the record adequately explains the decision to impose consecutive terms.	District court explained reasons; no abuse of discretion.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Berney, 378 N.W.2d 915 (Iowa 1985) (accomplice corroboration definition and purpose)
State v. Douglas, 675 N.W.2d 567 (Iowa 2004) (accomplice corroboration standard; cannot rely on sole accomplice testimony)
State v. Shanahan, 712 N.W.2d 121 (Iowa 2006) (instruction on law applicable to material issues)
State v. Taylor, 689 N.W.2d 116 (Iowa 2004) (balancing probative value with unfair prejudice under 404(b))
State v. Reynolds, 746 N.W.2d 283 (Iowa 2009) (admissibility of other-acts evidence for legitimate purposes)
State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2003) (totality-of-the-evidence test for prejudice in 404(b) analysis)
State v. Lyman, 776 N.W.2d 865 (Iowa 2010) (ineffective-assistance standard; objective reasonableness)
State v. Vance, 790 N.W.2d 775 (Iowa 2010) (procedure for assessing ineffective assistance on direct appeal)
State v. Artzer, 609 N.W.2d 526 (Iowa 2000) (Strickland prejudice analysis and totality of the evidence)
State v. Reynolds, 746 N.W.2d 837 (Iowa 2008) (reiterates 404(b) balancing test)
State v. Johnson, 445 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa 1989) (sentencing review and reasons on the record)
State v. Evans, 672 N.W.2d 328 (Iowa 2003) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review)
State v. Jacobs, 607 N.W.2d 679 (Iowa 2000) (consecutive-sentencing reasoning on the record)
State v. Keopasaeuth, 645 N.W.2d 637 (Iowa 2002) (requirement to provide reasons for sentencing decisions)
Anfinson v. State, 758 N.W.2d 496 (Iowa 2008) (trial-counsel strategic decisions; tactical vs. inattentive)
Ledezma v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134 (Iowa 2001) (context for evaluating counsel's duties and duties to object)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishing the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Shanahan, 712 N.W.2d 121 (Iowa 2006) (instruction on law applicable to material issues)