State of Iowa v. Steven A. Derrickson ( 2017 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 16-1721
Filed September 13, 2017
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
STEVEN A. DERRICKSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Nancy S. Tabor,
Judge.
Steven Derrickson appeals the sentence entered upon his guilty plea to
third-degree burglary. AFFIRMED.
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Brenda J. Gohr, Assistant
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Linda J. Hines, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ. Tabor, J.,
takes no part.
2
VAITHESWARAN, Presiding Judge.
Steven A. Derrickson admitted to serving as a lookout while his
accomplice entered the home of an elderly gentleman to steal pain medication.
Derrickson pled guilty to third-degree burglary. See Iowa Code § 713.6A(1)
(2016). The district court sentenced him to a prison term not exceeding five
years and imposed a fine and surcharge. On appeal, Derrickson contends “the
district court abused its discretion by improperly punishing [him] for being drug
addicted.” See State v. Thacker, 862 N.W.2d 402, 405 (Iowa 2015) (“When ‘the
sentence imposed is within the statutory maximum, we will only interfere if an
abuse of discretion is shown.’” (quoting State v. Luedtke, 279 N.W.2d 7, 8 (Iowa
1979))).
Derrickson’s attorney asked for probation. In rejecting this option and
imposing a prison term, the district court cited Derrickson’s “long history of
criminal behavior, including assaultive behavior” and his “prior probation
violations.” The court also pointed out that Derrickson “completed substance
abuse treatment in the community plus follow-up” and was “still involved in
substance abuse.” Derrickson’s “body language” in the courtroom, the court
said, spoke “volumes” about his character and revealed “a lack of accountability
and a lack of respect,” both essential to successful completion of probation. In
the court’s view, probation also was not appropriate given the “very serious
crime” and the need to protect the community. The court considered
Derrickson’s need for rehabilitation and determined that need could best be
accommodated within the Iowa prison system.
3
We discern no abuse of discretion in the court’s reasons for imposition of
a prison term. We affirm Derrickson’s sentence for third-degree burglary.
AFFIRMED.