 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Stigler, No. 6-311 / 05-0973,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, May 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not abuse its discretion in excluding testimony of defense witness who had not been disclosed to State pursuant to Iowa R. Crim. P. 2.13(4) where defendant obviously knew witness, his former girlfriend, before the day of trial. Further, defendant could have cross-examined State's witnesses regarding whether he had tattoo or silver tooth.
|
|||||
| State v. Sturgell, No. 6-247 /05-1201,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, May 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court improperly dismissed charge of second-degree harassment against defendant based on an alleged violation of his speedy indictment rights under Iowa R. Crim. P. 2.33(2)(a) because the harassment charge was not a lesser-included offense of the original charge and the State was not given notice of the trial court's intent to dismiss.
|
|||||
| State v. Wheeler, No. 6-214 / 04-2022,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, May 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion for a new trial under Iowa R. Crim. P. 2.24 was properly denied after a murder conviction because defendant failed to provide evidence of record to show that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard in determining whether specific intent or malice aforethought had been established.
|
|||||
| Wright v. State, No. 6-272 / 02-0886,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, May 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an applicant for post-conviction relief submitted documents showing that he did not have sufficient funds to pay an $80.00 filing fee, a district court failed to properly exercise its discretion under Iowa Code § 610A.1(2) when it dismissed the petition for relief without giving the applicant a chance to respond other than payment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
