The Iowa City Law Blog

I warn every client, multiple times, about the perils of violating probation on a deferred judgment.

When the Court grants a deferred judgment, the defendant is making a promise to the Court not to violate the terms of probation.  The Court becomes upset when this promise is broken.

The terms of probation are explained on the sentencing order. Depending on the offense, the defendant will be required to pay all fines, surcharges and costs, pay a supervision fee, complete community service, complete a substance abuse evaluation and recommended treatment and/or complete an approved drinking-drivers’ course.

The most perilous condition of probation, however, is to have no new law violations.

And for students living in Iowa City under the legal drinking age, a new law violation is a common way to lose the benefit of a deferred judgment.

While on a deferred judgment, a defendant is held to a different standard. He is under the microscope. His PAULA violation has much greater consequences than his friend that is not on probation.

For example, in a recent case of mine, a young man received a PAULA ticket within a few weeks of being granted a deferred judgment. His friends received the $330.00 fine and paid their tickets. My client paid the $330.00 fine and received four days in jail. And this was a break, considering the Court had the power to revoke the deferred judgment and sentence the young man to a greater period of time on the original charge.

Also, for a probation violation, there are very few legal defenses that can be used. Often times, the only way to approach the situation is to try and mitigate the punishment since it cannot be avoided altogether.

So please, make sure to avoid law violations if you are on a deferred judgment probation. There is little I can to once the violation occurs.

On Tuesday, April 20, 2010, a Johnson County jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty for Mark Thompson’s criminal jury trial.

The defendant was charged with Burglary in the Third Degree (a class D Felony).

The state alleged that the defendant entered the downtown apartment of the victim without permission, left behind some clothing, stole some clothing and perhaps some items from the refrigerator.

Obviously that does not sound like a typical burglary. And apparently the jury agreed.

At trial, Mark Thompson pointed out the prior friendly relationship the victim and the defendant held. Mark called a witness who testified that she thought the defendant and victim were roommates, based on the number of times she had seen them together at the apartment.

The State argued that a window had been used to enter and/or exit the apartment. But on cross examination, the victim admitted that he has used the window to enter and exit the apartment because he lost his key. The victim also admitted that he had previously given his name and phone number to the defendant on a piece of paper, which was admitted as part of the State’s evidence. This paper was used to confirm the friendly relationship the parties shared.

The jury also the option of returning a guilty verdict for the lesser-included offense of Criminal Trespass. The jury did not know that a Burglary charge carries up to a 5-year prison sentence, and the Criminal Trespass charge carries up to a 30-day jail sentence.

Nonetheless, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

There are several different crimes that are associated with trying to get into a bar, or purchase alcohol while underage.

The lowest-level ID-related crime is Misuse of Drivers License (belonging to another). This occurs when someone simply uses someone else’s ID in any fashion, representing it as their own. Note that it is not illegal to possess another’s ID, it’s simply illegal to use it. Also note that sometimes an officer might not know the law, or write up the charge based on an apparent intent to use the ID.

This is not truly a fake ID. It’s a real ID, that belongs to someone else. For this crime a defendant would pay a small fine, serve no jail time, and face a 30-day license suspension from the Iowa DOT.

The next crime is Misuse of DL (belonging to another) for the Purpose of Obtaining Alcohol. This crime carries the same criminal penalties, but the license suspension is increased to 6 months.

Finally we have the crime related to a completely fictitious ID. This would be an ID ordered via the Internet that was not manufactured by an appropriate state authority. Mere possession of this type of ID is a crime. It also carries the toughest penalties, up to one year in jail and a fine up to $1,875 (in 2010). More than likely the actual penalty would be no jail time and a fine of around $315, plus costs and court costs making the total closer to $500.

With the Possession of Fictitious ID crime, the defendant has the option of a deferred judgment. This option is not available on the Misuse charges detailed above. In that strange sense it could be better to be charged with this greater crime.

If a deferred judgment is granted, then the Iowa DOT should NOT issue any sort of license suspension. That’s another strange way as to why this may be the better crime to be charged with.

However, on a strictly level-of-the-crime interpretation, the Misuse charges are less severe, and can carry no jail time. And it is unlikely to receive no jail time or a deferred judgment if the defendant has a criminal or there were any unusual events surrounding the Fake ID charge.

Another warning, even though the Iowa DOT does not issue any sort of suspension/revocation after a deferred judgment, that does not mean that a defendant’s home state would not issue a suspension. Therefore, it’s not a bad idea to obtain an Iowa license/ID to avoid any interstate entanglements.