STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JAMES ALEXANDER EVANS, Defendant-Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 9-319 / 08-0532
Filed May 29, 2009
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
JAMES ALEXANDER EVANS,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Eliza J. Ovrom,
Judge.
Defendant claims that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge
submission of a jury instruction that included assault with intent to cause serious
injury as a lesser offense to the crime of attempt to commit murder. AFFIRMED.
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Shellie Knipfer, Assistant
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Thomas Tauber, Assistant Attorney
General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Frank Severino, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ.
2
VAITHESWARAN, P.J.
The State charged James Alexander Evans with several crimes, including
attempted murder, in connection with a robbery at a Des Moines store and a later
series of shots directed towards the store manager. See Iowa Code § 707.11
(2007). At trial, the jury was instructed on the elements of attempted murder and
the elements of assault with intent to inflict serious injury, a lesser-included
offense of attempted murder. The jury found Evans guilty of the lesser offense of
assault with intent to inflict serious injury.1
On appeal, Evans contends “trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting
to the inclusion of assault with intent to cause serious injury as a lesser included
offense to attempt to commit murder.” He maintains that, absent the instruction
on this lesser-included offense, the jury would have found him not guilty of
attempted murder.
Evans faces a significant hurdle because, long before his trial, Iowa courts
held that assault with intent to inflict serious injury is a lesser-included offense of
attempt to commit murder. Blanford v. State, 340 N.W.2d 796, 797 (Iowa Ct.
App. 1983); see State v. Luckett, 387 N.W.2d 298, 299 (Iowa 1986); State v.
Powers, 278 N.W.2d 26, 28 (Iowa 1978). As the issue was well-settled, trial
counsel had no duty to raise it. See Millam v. State, 745 N.W.2d 719, 721–22
(Iowa 2008). For the same reason, counsel also did not have an obligation to
parse the cited case law and question its validity, as Evans maintains. See id. at
722 (“We do not expect counsel to anticipate changes in the law, and counsel will
not be found ineffective for a lack of „clairvoyance.‟”); State v. Hepperle, 530
1
The remaining crimes are not at issue on appeal.
3
N.W.2d 735, 740 (Iowa 1995) (stating counsel did not breach an essential duty
by failing to “predict” or “foresee future changes” in the law).
Evans‟s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim fails.
We affirm Evans‟s judgment and sentence.
AFFIRMED.
Accordingly,
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.
