State of Iowa v. Kevin Charles Lind

Summary

The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of a human trafficking charge against Kevin Charles Lind under the 2024 version of Iowa Code sections 710A.1 and 710A.2. The court held that the statute’s reference to attempting to purchase commercial sexual services from a victim or another person engaged in human trafficking required an actual victim or person engaged in human trafficking, not merely the defendant’s belief that such persons existed. The court limited its holding to the pre-2025 statutory language and noted that a 2025 amendment expressly addressed law-enforcement decoys.

Holdings

1. An initial order disposing of only some issues in a criminal case was interlocutory, and the State was not required to appeal immediately. The State could appeal after the later order that finally disposed of the charge, giving the Supreme Court of Iowa jurisdiction to consider the entire appeal.
2. Under the 2024 version of Iowa Code section 710A.1(4)(b), an attempt to purchase services involving commercial sexual activity must be from an actual victim or another actual person engaged in human trafficking. The statutory term 'attempting' does not eliminate the requirement that such a person actually exist and actually be engaged in human trafficking.
3. The 2025 amendments materially changed the human-trafficking statute by expressly covering law-enforcement officers or agents posing as persons engaged in human trafficking and by expanding the definition of victim. The amendments therefore support the conclusion that the 2024 statute did not authorize prosecution based solely on an undercover sting involving no actual victim or trafficker.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the State's appeal was timely and whether the Supreme Court of Iowa had jurisdiction to consider arguments addressed in the district court's initial interlocutory dismissal order.
2. Under the 2024 version of Iowa Code section 710A.1(4)(b), whether a defendant can knowingly attempt to purchase commercial sexual services from a person engaged in human trafficking when the supposed vendor was actually an undercover police officer who was not engaged in human trafficking.
3. Under the 2024 version of Iowa Code sections 710A.1(4)(b) and 710A.1(13), whether a defendant can knowingly attempt to purchase commercial sexual services from a victim when the supposed minor victim did not exist.

Disposition

affirmed