Summary
The Supreme Court of Iowa held that Jason Allen Wing’s encounter with law enforcement constituted an arrest for purposes of Iowa’s speedy-indictment rule. Because the State filed the criminal complaint and trial information more than forty-five days after the arrest, the court reversed the district court’s judgment and remanded the case.
Holdings
- Wing was arrested on July 7, 2007, for purposes of Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(2)(a).
- The State violated Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(2)(a) because it did not file a timely indictment or trial information within forty-five days after Wing's arrest.
Questions Presented
- Whether Wing's encounter with law enforcement constituted an arrest for purposes of Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(2)(a).
- Whether the trial information filed approximately six months after the July 7, 2007 encounter was untimely under the forty-five-day speedy-indictment rule.
- Whether later transportation to Wing's home and discussion of cooperation prevented the speedy-indictment clock from beginning when Wing was handcuffed, Mirandized, searched, and placed in the patrol car.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (26)
- State v. Dennison, 571 N.W.2d 492 (Iowa 1997)(followed)
- State v. Lyrek, 385 N.W.2d 248 (Iowa 1986)(followed)
- State v. Schmitt, 290 N.W.2d 24 (Iowa 1980)(followed)
- State v. Johnson-Hugi, 484 N.W.2d 599 (Iowa 1992)(distinguished)
- State v. Delockroy, 559 N.W.2d 43 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996)(followed)
- State v. Smith, 552 N.W.2d 163 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996)(distinguished)
- State v. Davis, 525 N.W.2d 837 (Iowa 1994)(followed)
- State v. Cennon, 201 N.W.2d 715 (Iowa 1972)(followed)
- State v. Deases, 476 N.W.2d 91 (Iowa Ct. App. 1991)(followed)
- State v. Allnutt, 156 N.W.2d 266 (Iowa 1968)(limited)
Showing top 10 of 26.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…