State of Iowa v. Lindsey Marie Perry
State of Iowa v. Lindsey Marie Perry
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 19-1844 Filed September 1, 2021
STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LINDSEY MARIE PERRY, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.
Lindsey Perry appeals her conviction following a guilty plea. APPEAL DISMISSED.
Fred Stiefel, Victor, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Bridget A. Chambers, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Scott, S.J.* *Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2021).
SCOTT, Senior Judge.
Lindsey Perry appeals her conviction, following a guilty plea, of first-offense operating while intoxicated. The crime amounted to a serious misdemeanor, punishable by, among other things, a fine of $1250.1 Iowa Code § 321J.2(3)(c).
Perry’s written guilty plea, a form, provided the maximum fine for serious misdemeanors was $1875. See Iowa Code § 903.1(1)(b) (providing fine for serious misdemeanors in the event a specific penalty is not provided).2 Also, a box was checked next to “OWI 1st,” and the fine listed in the “Additional minimum sentence” column was $1250. Lastly, the written plea noted the plea agreement called for a $1250 fine.
Based on the foregoing, Perry claims her plea was not knowing and voluntary because her written guilty plea incorrectly stated the maximum penalty for her serious misdemeanor offense was $1875, as opposed to $1250. She also claims her plea was not supported by a sufficient factual basis. She agrees error was not preserved on either claim because no motion in arrest of judgment was filed.3 So she argues her counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion in arrest
The State responds Perry has no right of appeal because she pled guilty and lacks good cause. See Iowa Code § 814.6(1)(a)(3). We agree. See Treptow, N.W.2d at 109 (finding a legally sufficient reason lacking because the court could not provide relief on appeal when defendant failed to file a motion in arrest of judgment). The State also asserts we have no authority to consider ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal. See Iowa Code § 814.7. We agree with that proposition as well. See Treptow, 960 N.W.2d at 109 (“[T]his court is without authority to decide ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims on direct appeal.”).
We dismiss the appeal.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
of judgment and is thus excepted from the error-preservation requirement. See State v. Treptow, 960 N.W.2d 98, 109 (Iowa 2021).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.