STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. DOUGLAS J. BOHRN, Defendant-Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 9-814 / 09-0460
Filed November 12, 2009
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
DOUGLAS J. BOHRN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Duane E.
Hoffmeyer (guilty plea) and Gary E. Wenell (sentencing), Judges.
Douglas Bohrn appeals from the judgment and sentence imposed
following his guilty plea to two counts of forgery. AFFIRMED.
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Thomas J. Gaul, Assistant
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kevin Cmelik, Assistant Attorney
General, Patrick Jennings, County Attorney, and James Loomis, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Danilson, J., and Mahan, S.J.*
*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2009).
2
POTTERFIELD, P.J.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
In September 2007, Denise Uhl lost her checkbook and reported the loss
to the police. In December 2007, she received notification that someone was
using her checks.
Officers Kenneth Welch, Jacob Noltze, and Bryan Noll
participated in investigating the matter. The officers viewed store surveillance
videos in an attempt to identify the individual writing the checks, but the video
quality was too poor to make an identification. However, the videos showed the
checks were passed by a woman with children and a man.
On March 18, 2008, Shana Walsh went to the police station and turned
herself in. She admitted she was the woman shown in the surveillance videos
and that she had participated in passing Uhl’s checks. Walsh also told police
that the man shown in the videos was her ex-boyfriend, Douglas Bohrn. She
claimed Bohrn was involved in passing Uhl’s checks and that he had signed
several of them himself.
Based on Walsh’s statements, on July 21, 2008, the State filed a trial
information charging Bohrn with two counts of forgery as a habitual offender in
violation of Iowa Code section 715A.2(2)(a)(3) (2007). Bohrn initially pleaded not
guilty, but he later changed his plea to guilty pursuant to a plea agreement. The
plea agreement provided that in exchange for Bohrn’s guilty plea to two charges
of forgery, the State would eliminate the habitual offender designation.
On
February 27, 2009, the district court accepted Bohrn’s guilty plea to two counts of
forgery and later sentenced him to two consecutive terms of five years as well as
payment of fines and restitution, according to the plea agreement.
3
Bohrn now appeals from the judgment and conviction, arguing his counsel
was ineffective for failing to file a motion to dismiss based on the lack of
corroboration of Walsh’s statements, thus rendering his plea involuntary.
II. Standard of Review
Because Bohrn asserts a constitutional violation, we review the totality of
the circumstances de novo. Taylor v. State, 352 N.W.2d 683, 684 (Iowa 1984).
III. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Bohrn asserts he received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial
counsel failed to file a motion to dismiss based on the lack of corroboration of
Walsh’s statements. In order to prove that his counsel was ineffective, Bohrn
must show that: (1) his counsel failed to perform an essential duty; and (2)
prejudice resulted from that failure. Id. We can affirm on appeal if either element
is lacking. Id.
Generally, we do not resolve claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on
direct appeal. State v. Biddle, 652 N.W.2d 191, 203 (Iowa 2002). We prefer to
leave
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel
claims
for
postconviction
relief
proceedings. State v. Lopez, 633 N.W.2d 774, 784 (Iowa 2001). “[W]e preserve
such claims for postconviction relief proceedings, where an adequate record of
the claim can be developed . . . .” Biddle, 652 N.W.2d at 203.
Bohrn is required to show that, but for counsel’s error, he would not have
pleaded guilty.
Where there is no evidence showing whether a defendant
suffered prejudice from his counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness in connection with
his guilty plea, the defendant must raise his ineffective assistance claim in an
action for post-conviction relief. See State v. Straw, 709 N.W.2d 128, 138 (Iowa
4
2006). We conclude the record before us is inadequate to address Bohrn’s claim
of ineffective assistance on direct appeal. We therefore preserve the issue for a
possible postconviction proceeding. See State v. Bass, 385 N.W.2d 243, 245
(Iowa 1986).
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.
