State of Iowa v. Eric Joseph Ryan
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 20-0364 Filed September 22, 2021 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ERIC JOSEPH RYAN, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Daniel Kitchen, District Associate Judge. The defendant appeals his convictions for two counts of indecent contact with a child by raising ineffective assistance of counsel. AFFIRMED. Martha J. Lucey, State Appellate Defender, and Shellie L. Knipfer, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Genevieve Reinkoester, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ. 2 GREER, Judge. After a jury convicted Eric Ryan of two counts of indecent contact with a child, he appeals. But, his appeal focuses only on his trial counsel’s alleged ineffective assistance.1 As judgment was not entered in Ryan’s case until February 2020, this court has no authority to decide a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal. See Iowa Code § 814.7 (2020); State v. Tucker, 959 N.W.2d 140, 154 (Iowa 2021). While Ryan raises reasons we should still review his claims, none win the day.2 Accordingly, we affirm without further opinion. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(a), (c), (e). AFFIRMED. 1 The ineffective-assistance claims involve allegations trial counsel (1) did not object to comments made by the State during closing and opening, (2) failed to move for mistrial when the jury observed the witnesses crying and refusing to enter the courtroom, and (3) failed to strike the comments of law enforcement that children do not lie about sexual abuse. 2 Ryan argues Iowa Code section 814.7 violates the Equal Protection clause, denies him due process and the right to effective counsel on appeal, and improperly restricts the role of the appellate courts. See State v. Treptow, 960 N.W.2d 98, 104-08 (Iowa 2021) (finding unsuccessful the appellant’s challenges to 814.7 on separation-of-powers, equal protection, right to effective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, and due process grounds).
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.
