IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 15-1953
Filed June 29, 2016
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
GREGORY C. CANADAY,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Fowler,
District Associate Judge.
Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for public intoxication,
third or subsequent offense. AFFIRMED.
Les M. Blair III of Blair & Fitzsimmons, P.C. Dubuque, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Sharon K. Hall, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.
2
BOWER, Judge.
Defendant Gregory Canaday appeals his conviction for public intoxication,
third or subsequent offense. We determine the district court did not abuse its
discretion in sentencing Canaday to 365 days in the county jail, with the condition
the sentence would be reconsidered upon completion of a jail-based substance
abuse treatment program. We determine Canaday’s claims of ineffective
assistance of counsel must be preserved for possible postconviction
proceedings. We affirm Canaday’s conviction and sentence.
I. Background Facts & Proceedings
On August 3, 2015, Canaday was charged with public intoxication, third or
subsequent offense, in violation of Iowa Code section 123.91(2) (2015), an
aggravated misdemeanor. He completed a residential treatment program after
he was charged.
On November 13, 2015, Canaday signed a written plea of guilty to the
charge. He signed his initials next to the statement, “A plea agreement in my
case exists as evidenced by a memorandum of plea agreement which I have
signed. I understand that any plea agreement is not binding on the Court.”
Canaday’s initials also appear next to the following handwritten statements on
the written guilty plea form:
365 days jail all suspended
$625.00 fine – suspended
successful completion of Substance Abuse Evaluation and all
recommended treatment a condition of probation
enter [unknown] for all owed moneys
3
The written guilty plea was also signed by Canaday’s defense attorney. A
memorandum of plea agreement is not found in the record.
During a hearing held on November 13, 2015, there was no mention of a
plea agreement. Canaday entered a guilty plea to public intoxication, third or
subsequent offense, and the court accepted his plea. Canaday asked to be
sentenced immediately. The State recommended 365 days in the county jail,
with the condition the sentence could be reconsidered if Canaday successfully
completed the jail-based substance abuse treatment program. Defense counsel
pointed out Canaday had just completed a residential treatment program and
asked for probation so Canaday could attend an extended outpatient program.
The court sentenced Canaday to 365 days in jail, with the condition the sentence
would be reconsidered when he completed the jail-based substance abuse
treatment program. Canaday appeals.
II. Sentencing
Canaday claims the district court abused its discretion by sentencing him
to 365 days in the county jail instead of ordering a suspended sentence. He
states he had just completed a residential treatment program and needed to
participate in an extended outpatient program. He states the court was requiring
him to complete the program he had just completed, rather than permitting him to
progress in his treatment.
On appeal, we review a defendant’s sentence for the correction of errors
at law. State v. Valin, 724 N.W.2d 440, 444 (Iowa 2006). When a sentence is
within the statutory limits, we determine whether the court has abused its
4
discretion. Id. “An abuse of discretion will only be found when a court acts on
grounds clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable.” State v.
Hopkins, 860 N.W.2d 550, 553 (Iowa 2015).
The court sentenced Canaday to 365 days in the county jail, with the
condition the sentence would be reconsidered upon completion of the jail-based
substance abuse treatment program. The court noted Canaday could have been
sentenced to up to two years in prison but found the record showed Canaday
needed treatment. The court stated, “I know you engaged in treatment, but we
have to make sure you stay in treatment and not incur any further law violations.”
The court informed Canaday he would be released once he completed treatment.
We determine the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing
Canaday, who had several previous convictions for public intoxication.
III. Ineffective Assistance
Canaday raises two alternative arguments in his claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel. He claims either he received ineffective assistance
because defense counsel did not object to the State’s failure to abide by the
terms of the plea agreement regarding sentencing or he received ineffective
assistance because defense counsel misled him as to the terms of the plea
agreement. The State responds the record does not show there was a plea
agreement.
We review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo. Ennenga
v. State, 812 N.W.2d 696, 701 (Iowa 2012). To establish a claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel, a defendant must show (1) the attorney failed to perform
5
an essential duty and (2) prejudice resulted to the extent it denied the defendant
a fair trial. State v. Carroll, 767 N.W.2d 638, 641 (Iowa 2009). “We will address
on direct appeal claims of ineffective assistance of counsel only if we determine
the development of an additional factual record would not be helpful and these
elements can be decided as a matter of law.” Id.
We cannot determine from the present record whether there was a plea
agreement, and if there was a plea agreement, whether the State breached the
agreement by failing to make a sentencing recommendation in accordance with
the agreement. See State v. Bearse, 748 N.W.2d 211, 215-16 (Iowa 2008)
(noting a “fundamental component of plea bargaining is the prosecutor’s
obligation to comply with a promise to make a sentencing recommendation”).
Furthermore, the record is not adequate to determine whether Canaday was
misadvised by defense counsel prior to entering a guilty plea. We determine
Canaday’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel must be preserved for
possible postconviction proceedings.
We affirm Canaday’s conviction and sentence.
AFFIRMED.
State of Iowa v. Gregory C. Canaday
Combined Opinion