STATE OF IOWA vs. NATHAN JEFFREY VERHEUL
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 08–0845
Filed April 30, 2010
STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
NATHAN JEFFREY VERHEUL,
Appellant.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, James D.
Birkenholz, Judge.
Defendant
appeals
from
the
State’s voluntary
dismissal
of
operating-while-intoxicated complaint. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
R. A. Bartolomei of Bartolomei & Lange, PLC, Des Moines, for
appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Sharon K. Hall, Assistant
Attorney General, John Sarcone, County Attorney, and Matthew H.
McKinney, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
2
PER CURIAM.
Verhuel challenges the State’s voluntary dismissal of criminal
operating-a-motor-vehicle-while-intoxicated charges.
The defendant
asserts that the dismissal was not “in the furtherance of justice” under
Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(1) because the prosecution offered
no reason for the dismissal unrelated to the merits of his pending motion
to suppress. If Verheul prevailed on the pending suppression motion,
Iowa Code section 321J.13(6) would require the exclusion of the
suppressed evidence in a civil proceeding to suspend or revoke his
driving privileges.
The issue of the interplay of rule 2.33(1) and section 321J.13(6)
was addressed in a companion case decided today, State v. Taeger, ___
N.W.2d ___ (Iowa 2010). Based on the reasoning contained in Taeger,
the order of the district court dismissing this case is reversed and the
matter is remanded to the district court for an adjudication on the
motion to suppress.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
This opinion shall not be published.
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.
