From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Vanausdall

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Feb 27, 2004
No. 3-596 / 03-0482 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2004)

Opinion

No. 3-596 / 03-0482

Filed February 27, 2004

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Bobbi M. Alpers, Judge.

Scott Francis Vanausdall appeals from his conviction for criminal mischief in the third degree and domestic assault causing injury. AFFIRMED.

Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and Stephan Japuntich, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kristin Mueller, Assistant Attorney General, William Davis, County Attorney, and Robert Weinberg, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.

Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vaitheswaran, J., and Snell, S.J.

Senior Judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2003).


Scott Vanausdall appeals from his conviction for criminal mischief in the third degree and domestic assault causing injury. The State and defendant filed a memorandum of plea agreement. On the same date, defendant filed a written guilty plea. The district court accepted the pleas, sentenced defendant to consecutive terms of incarceration totaling three years, and a fine of $500. Additionally, defendant was ordered to pay $100 restitution to the victim.

Our review is for correction of errors at law. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; State v. Henning, 299 N.W.2d 909, 910 (Iowa 1980).

Defendant claims error in that a factual basis was not established before the plea of guilty was accepted. No motion in arrest of judgment was filed. This does not preclude defendant from challenging the guilty plea, however, by claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. We will examine this issue based on whether prejudice resulted from counsel's error, if error did occur. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064, 80 L.Ed.2d 674, 693 (1984).

In determining whether a factual basis exists for defendant's guilty plea, we consider the entire record before the district court including the minutes of testimony and any statements made by the defendant during the plea colloquy. State v. Brooks, 555 N.W.2d 446, 448 (Iowa 1996). It may also be established by reference to the prosecutor's statements and by examination of the presentence investigation (P.S.I.). State v. Hanson, 234 N.W.2d 878, 879 (Iowa 1975).

Iowa Code section 716.1 (2001) defines criminal mischief as follows: any damage, defacing, alteration, or destruction of property is criminal mischief when done intentionally by one who has no right to so act. Third-degree mischief occurs when the cost of repairing, replacing or restoring the property exceeds $500 but does not exceed $1,000. Iowa Code § 716.5. Criminal mischief requires proof of specific intent to cause the harm. See State v. Chang, 587 N.W.2d 459, 461 (Iowa 1998). Proof of intent often depends on circumstantial evidence and inferences drawn from the evidence. Id.

Defendant argues specific intent is lacking. The referenced sources show defendant was angry with Lisa, yelling at her and shoving her around. He got into her car, drove through her yard and left tire tracks in the yard. Next, he drove around the house and over a picnic table. Then, he jumped on the roof of the car smashing it down. An officer discovered parts of the vehicle in the yard and the broken picnic table. He also found that all of the phones in Lisa's home had been pulled from the wall. Specific intent has been proven.

Defendant questions the value placed on the damage. He cites the restitution order as requiring payment of only $100. The minutes state that the defendant caused damage of approximately $2,000. Third-degree criminal mischief has been established by proof of damages in the requisite amount.

Domestic abuse assault causing injury is defined by Iowa Code section 708.1. After defendant jumped onto the roof of Lisa's car, smashing it down, Lisa attempted to open the trunk. The minutes state that defendant slammed the trunk onto her hand causing swelling and redness to her finger. Following the injury Lisa and another daughter ran into nearby cornfields to get away from defendant. Lisa was scared of defendant because "he had just lost control and was in a rage." Lisa watched as defendant drove her vehicle again looking for them. Lisa and her daughter walked through the fields until they found a residence where someone was home.

Section 708.1 requires that the act done is intended to cause pain or injury. Section 708.2A includes an assault between household members who reside together. Defendant claims these facts are not established. However, the minutes and P.S.I. belie these assertions. Lisa reported to an officer that defendant was her "live in boyfriend." The minutes refer to her home as a shared residence. Defendant needs only to have had the general intent to assault Lisa. Bacon v. Bacon, 567 N.W.2d 414, 417 (Iowa 1997). The acts of defendant show this intent when he injured her hand and finger.

Our review convinces us that defendant's appeal is without merit. The judgments are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

State v. Vanausdall

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Feb 27, 2004
No. 3-596 / 03-0482 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2004)
Case details for

State v. Vanausdall

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SCOTT FRANCIS VANAUSDALL…

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Feb 27, 2004

Citations

No. 3-596 / 03-0482 (Iowa Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2004)