State of Iowa v. Malcolm Nix ( 2016 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 15-0497
Filed May 11, 2016
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
MALCOLM NIX,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F.
Staudt, Judge.
Malcolm Nix appeals his judgment and sentence for first-degree robbery
and felon in possession of a firearm. AFFIRMED.
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Maria L. Ruhtenberg,
Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.
2
VAITHESWARAN, Presiding Judge.
Malcolm Nix appeals his judgment and sentence for first-degree robbery
and felon in possession of a firearm. He contends his trial attorney was
ineffective in failing to file a motion to suppress an on-the-scene identification of
him by the person he was accused of robbing. While we generally preserve
ineffective assistance claims for postconviction relief, we find the record
adequate to address the issue. See State v. McMurry, 544 N.W.2d 444, 448
(Iowa 1996).
To establish ineffective assistance, Nix must prove (1) the breach of an
essential duty and (2) prejudice. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668,
687 (1984). Here, we need only address the prejudice prong. See Dempsey v.
State, 860 N.W.2d 860, 868 (Iowa 2015) (“If we conclude a claimant has failed to
establish either of these elements, we need not address the remaining
element.”). This prong requires a showing that, but for counsel’s errors, the
result of the proceeding would have been different. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at
694. Where the evidence of guilt is overwhelming, we will find no prejudice. Id.
at 696 (“[A] verdict or conclusion only weakly supported by the record is more
likely to have been affected by errors than one with overwhelming record
support.”).
The evidence of Nix’s guilt was overwhelming. The man who was robbed
provided police with a detailed description of the robber, including the clothes he
wore. He stated the robber carried a “small silver steal gun,” pointed the gun at
him, stole $20, and “ran to a red car” parked in an alleyway.
3
Officers dusted the robbed man’s car for fingerprints. The Cedar Falls
Police Department determined Nix’s fingers contributed to three of the prints.
Officers stopped a red Pontiac Grand Prix. Nix was in the vehicle and was
wearing clothing that matched the description provided by the man who was
robbed. Nix “threw down nineteen dollars on the ground.” “The denominations
of the currency” were consistent with the denominations described by the robbed
man. Other occupants of the vehicle described a gun in Nix’s possession as
small and silver.
In light of this overwhelming evidence of guilt, Nix was not prejudiced by
his trial attorney’s failure to file a motion to suppress the on-the-scene
identification. Accordingly, his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim fails. We
affirm his judgment and sentence for first-degree robbery and felon in possession
of a firearm.
AFFIRMED.