Goode v. State

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 17-0318
Filed February 7, 2018
DEANDRE D. GOODE,
Applicant-Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF IOWA,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John G. Linn,
Judge.
An applicant appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.
AFFIRMED.
Trent A. Henkelvig of Henkelvig Law, Danville, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Bridget A. Chambers, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee State.
Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.
2
MCDONALD, Judge.
DeAndre Goode was convicted of robbery in the second degree, in violation
of Iowa Code sections 711.1 and 711.3 (2011), for a crime that occurred November
24, 2012. This court affirmed the conviction on direct appeal. See State v. Goode,
No. 13-1028, 2014 WL 3511816, at *1–3 (Iowa Ct. App. July 16, 2014). The facts
and circumstances of the offense are set forth in our prior opinion and need not be
repeated herein. This appeal arises out of the denial of Goode’s application for
postconviction relief.
In this appeal, Goode contends his postconviction counsel provided
ineffective assistance in failing to sufficiently develop the record to prove Goode’s
claim that he had newly discovered evidence supporting his alibi defense. Goode
raises his appellate claim under the federal and state constitutions and asks that
this matter be remanded for further development of the record. We decline to do;
Goode’s claim is without merit. The constitutional right to counsel applies to the
assistance of trial counsel and appellate counsel; there is no constitutional right to
postconviction relief, postconviction counsel, or the effective assistance of
postconviction counsel. See Williams v. Pennsylvania, 136 S. Ct. 1899, 1921
(2016) (Thomas, J., dissenting); Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718, 746
(2016) (Thomas, J., dissenting) (“Because the Constitution does not require
postconviction remedies, it certainly does not require postconviction courts to
revisit every potential type of error.”). While there is a statutory right to the effective
assistance of postconviction counsel, see Dunbar v. State, 515 N.W.2d 12, 15
(Iowa 1994), no such claim is presented in this appeal.
AFFIRMED.