ARAMIS SAUERS, Applicant-Appellant, vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respondent-Appellee.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 9-1011 / 09-0555
Filed December 30, 2009
ARAMIS SAUERS,
Applicant-Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF IOWA,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Bryan
H. McKinley, Judge.
Appeal from the district court’s order dismissing the application for
postconviction relief. AFFIRMED.
Andrew C. Abbott of Abbott Law Office, P.C., Waterloo, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Elisabeth S. Reynoldson, Assistant
Attorney General, Paul L. Martin, County Attorney, and Erica W. Clark, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Danilson, JJ.
2
SACKETT, C.J.
Applicant-appellant, Aramis Sauers, appeals from the district court order
dismissing his application for postconviction relief. He contends postconviction
counsel was ineffective (1) in unilaterally dismissing all but one of the claims
raised in the pro se application for postconviction relief, and (2) in not seeking
reinstatement of the remaining claims from the pro se application. We affirm.
Appellant filed a pro se application for postconviction relief. He alleged
trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform him of the lifetime supervision
provisions of Iowa Code section 903B.1 (2007) prior to his guilty plea.
He
requested that the lifetime supervision portion of his sentence be removed.
Counsel was appointed to represent him. The State filed a motion requesting
that the application be dismissed. Counsel resisted the motion and requested
that appellant be resentenced with the lifetime supervision provisions of section
903B.1 stricken, arguing trial counsel was ineffective (1) in failing to advise
appellant of the applicability of section 903B.1 prior to his guilty plea, and (2) in
failing to argue the provisions of section 903B.1 violate the Eighth Amendment
prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment as well as his “right to travel.” The
State’s motion for summary dismissal came on for hearing. Appellant was not
present and did not testify. At the unreported hearing, counsel informed the court
that the “sole grounds” being relied on was the failure of trial counsel to challenge
the constitutionality of Iowa Code section 903B.1. The district court analyzed the
claim and granted the State’s motion for summary dismissal.
3
On appeal, appellant contends he never had discussions with counsel
about restricting or limiting the issues in the postconviction proceeding to a
constitutional challenge to section 903B.1 and did not authorize counsel to limit
his application. He asserts counsel failed to address the most important issues
he raised in his pro se application.
Generally, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not resolved on
direct appeal.
State v. Biddle, 652 N.W.2d 191, 203 (Iowa 2002).
Such
questions are usually reserved for postconviction proceedings so counsel has an
opportunity to defend against the charge. State v. Tate, 710 N.W.2d 237, 240
(Iowa 2006).
Only in rare cases will the record on direct appeal alone be
sufficient to resolve the claim. Id. (citing State v. Straw, 709 N.W.2d 128, 133
(Iowa 2006)). Although the State proffers a reasonable explanation for counsel’s
actions, that appellant would lose the benefit of the plea agreement if he were to
challenge the plea itself instead of just a portion of the sentence, we conclude the
record is insufficient for us to address appellant’s claims. We reserve appellant’s
ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel claims for possible further
postconviction proceedings to allow full development of the facts surrounding
counsel’s conduct. See Straw, 709 N.W.2d at 133.
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.