State v. Neitzel, 801 N.W.2d 612

Neitzel, age 16, sexually abused a 7-year-old at the father’s house in August 2007.
Charged with second-degree sexual abuse in December 2007; initial disposition requested transfer to juvenile court in January 2008.
District court denied transfer on February 11, 2008; defense sought competency examinations thereafter.
Two competency reports (Dr. Ravipati and Dr. Rogers) indicated below-average intellect but concluded competency to stand trial; district court denied next steps in March 2010.
Trial occurred in April 2010; victim TK testified in some form, with corroborating medical and interview testimony; verdict: guilty as charged.
Post-trial motions challenged hearsay rulings and sought new trial; claims on ineffective assistance of counsel were raised but appellate court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Transfer to juvenile court	Neitzel argues factors require reverse waiver.	State contends district court properly weighed factors and declined transfer.	No abuse of discretion; court adequately considered factors and denied transfer.
Competency to stand trial	Neitzel contends mental deficiencies prevented understanding and participation.	State argues competency shown by exams; defendant able to understand charges and assist counsel.	Competent to stand trial; district court correctly found competency based on evidence.
Hearsay evidence admissibility	Ward/Scarmon interviews and videotape were inadmissible hearsay.	Evidence admissible under Rule 5.803(4) and 5.807 and related statutes.	Admissible under 5.803(4) and 5.807; statements reliable and probative; not prejudicial.
Sufficiency of the evidence	Contradictory testimony undermines guilt; TK did not testify at trial.	Corroborating evidence and TK's out-of-court statements support conviction beyond reasonable doubt.	Sufficient evidence supports conviction; jury could rely on corroboration and expert/interview testimony.
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel failed on objecting to notes, weight-of-the-evidence claim, and trial prep.	Record shows no prejudice; strategic decisions or lack of preservation argue against relief.	Two claims adjudicated on direct appeal lacked prejudice; third preserved for potential postconviction relief; overall affirmed.

In re J.J.A., 580 N.W.2d 731 (Iowa 1998) (abuse of discretion standard for juvenile reverse waiver)
State v. Terry, 569 N.W.2d 364 (Iowa 1997) (reverse waiver criteria guidance)
State v. Lyman, 776 N.W.2d 865 (Iowa 2010) (competency standard and procedure)
State v. Mann, 512 N.W.2d 528 (Iowa 1994) (subnormal intelligence considered among factors for competency)
State v. Hildreth, 582 N.W.2d 167 (Iowa 1998) (hearsay under 803(4) child testimony in medical context)
State v. Tracy, 482 N.W.2d 675 (Iowa 1992) (two-part test for admissibility under 803(4))
State v. Weaver, 554 N.W.2d 240 (Iowa 1996) (timing of statements bears on trustworthiness)
State v. Rojas, 524 N.W.2d 659 (Iowa 1994) (trustworthiness and necessity in residual exception analysis)
State v. Webb, 648 N.W.2d 72 (Iowa 2002) (sufficiency review and standard of review)
State v. Maxwell, 743 N.W.2d 185 (Iowa 2008) (prejudice required for weight-of-the-evidence challenges)
State v. Reeves, 670 N.W.2d 199 (Iowa 2003) (ineffective assistance; standard and prejudice analysis)