State v. Hoegh

Summary

The Supreme Court of Iowa held that district courts possess inherent authority to appoint a special prosecutor when necessary to administer justice, notwithstanding Iowa Code section 331.754(1), which grants appointment authority to county boards of supervisors in specified circumstances. The court concluded that the district court was not justified in exercising that inherent authority here because the record did not show that the board's statutory authority was inadequate. The court affirmed dismissal of the trial information filed by the special prosecutor.

Holdings

1. A district court has inherent authority to appoint a special prosecutor when necessary for the administration of justice.
2. The 2000 amendment did not abrogate the district court's inherent authority to appoint a special prosecutor, but the statutory grant of appointment authority to the county board of supervisors restricted and limited the circumstances in which the court should exercise its inherent power.
3. The district court was not justified in exercising its inherent authority because the record did not establish a genuine necessity for judicial intervention; consequently, the trial information filed by the special prosecutor was properly dismissed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a district court possesses inherent authority to appoint a special prosecutor when the county attorney is disqualified by a conflict of interest.
2. Whether the 2000 amendment to Iowa Code section 331.754(1), granting the county board of supervisors authority to appoint an attorney to act as county attorney in specified circumstances, abrogated or limited the district court's inherent authority.
3. Whether the district court was justified in exercising its inherent authority to appoint a special prosecutor under the circumstances presented.

Disposition

affirmed