State of Iowa v. Daniel McTaggart ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
    No. 15-1090
    Filed August 17, 2016
    STATE OF IOWA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    vs.
    DANIEL MCTAGGART,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ________________________________________________________________
    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Ackley,
    Judge.
    The defendant appeals from his guilty plea for robbery in the second
    degree. AFFIRMED.
    Matthew L. Noel of Mayer, Lonergan & Rolfes, Clinton, for appellant.
    Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kyle P. Hanson, Assistant
    Attorney General, for appellee.
    Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ.
    2
    POTTERFIELD, Presiding Judge.
    Daniel McTaggart appeals from his guilty plea for robbery in the second
    degree pursuant to a plea agreement reducing the charge from robbery in the
    first degree. Following his guilty plea, McTaggart filed two motions in arrest of
    judgment, which were denied, and new counsel was appointed to represent him.
    On appeal, he maintains he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel
    because (1) counsel had not adequately reviewed the discovery to properly
    advise him regarding the strength of the State’s case against him, and (2)
    counsel wrongly advised him that he would likely receive probation rather than
    jail time. McTaggart asserts that he would have chosen to go to trial if he had
    known: (1) the weakness of the State’s case against him and (2) that receiving a
    suspended sentence and probation was not a possible outcome of his guilty
    plea.1 The State argues the issues should be preserved to allow for a more
    complete record.
    Because claims of ineffective assistance have their basis in the
    constitution, we review de novo. State v. Willis, 
    696 N.W.2d 20
    , 22 (Iowa 2005).
    Here, we have only McTaggart’s assertions that counsel failed to read the
    State’s discovery and improperly advised him regarding his possible sentence. 2
    1
    McTaggart pled guilty to robbery in the second degree, which is a forcible felony, and
    therefore he was not eligible for a suspended sentence. See Iowa Code §§ 702.11,
    907.3 (2013).
    2
    Counsel admitted on the record at the hearing for the motion in arrest of judgment that
    he was not aware of, and thus did not previously advise McTaggart of, the mandatory
    minimum until the time for the plea colloquy. However, according to the record before
    us, once counsel and McTaggart became aware of the mandatory minimum, McTaggart
    was given time to consult with counsel off the record. McTaggart was also told during
    the plea colloquy that he could stop proceedings at any point to consult with counsel.
    During the colloquy, McTaggart was asked if he was aware both that there was a
    mandatory minimum concerning the sentence and that it was a seven-tenths
    3
    See Kirchner v. State, 
    756 N.W.2d 202
    , 206 (Iowa 2008) (noting that for an
    ineffective-assistance claim, prejudice must be shown by something more than a
    self-serving statement). A defendant is entitled to effective representation during
    the plea bargaining process. State v. Dempsey, 
    806 N.W.2d 860
    , 868 (Iowa
    2015). But the record before us is not adequate to determine whether McTaggart
    received it. See State v. Atley, 
    564 N.W.2d 817
    , 833 (Iowa 1997) (stating we
    generally preserve claims of ineffective assistance “to allow full development of
    the facts” and only in rare cases will we do otherwise). Therefore, we preserve
    McTaggart’s claims of ineffective assistance for possible future proceedings.
    See State. v. Johnson, 
    784 N.W.2d 192
    , 198 (Iowa 2010) (“If . . . the court
    determines the claim cannot be addressed on appeal, the court must preserve it
    for a postconviction-relief proceeding, regardless of the court’s view of the
    potential viability of the claim.”); see also Iowa Code § 814.7(3). We affirm.
    AFFIRMED.
    requirement, “which means [he would] stay in prison for seven years before [he was]
    eligible for parole.” McTaggart answered both questions affirmatively and then entered
    his guilty plea.