CourtListener 4241970•State of Iowa v. Joshua Daniels
Gesamter Gesetzestext
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 15-1544
Filed July 27, 2016
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
JOSHUA DANIELS,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Steven J. Oeth,
Judge.
A defendant appeals his conviction of domestic assault challenging the
sufficiency of the evidence. AFFIRMED.
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Maria L. Ruhtenberg,
Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Louis S. Sloven, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.
2
VOGEL, Presiding Judge.
Joshua Daniels was convicted by a jury of domestic assault as a habitual
offender, as well as harassment in the first degree. He appeals claiming there
was insufficient evidence to support his assault conviction because the State
failed to prove the existence of a domestic relationship between himself and the
victim, his mother.1
We review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence for correction of
errors at law. State v. Romer, 832 N.W.2d 169, 174 (Iowa 2013).
In reviewing challenges to the sufficiency of evidence supporting a
guilty verdict, courts consider all of the record evidence viewed in
the light most favorable to the State, including all reasonable
inferences that may be fairly drawn from the evidence. We will
uphold a verdict if substantial record evidence supports it.
Id.
Daniels lived in a camping trailer located on his parents’ property. While
Daniels’s trailer had electricity, the heating system was not sufficient during the
winter months, so Daniels would sleep in his parents’ home. Also, Daniels’s
trailer did not have running water, so he regularly showered in his parents’ home
or at a friend’s house. Evidence was presented to the jury that on May 3, 2015,
during an argument outside his parents’ home, Daniels threw a beer bottle at his
mother that broke when it hit the ground.
Daniels argues on appeal that the State failed to prove that he resided
with his mother, thus negating the element that the act was between family or
household members who resided together at the time of the assault or between
persons who have been family or household members residing together within
1
Daniels does not appeal from the harassment conviction.
3
the past year and are not residing together at the time of the assault. See Iowa
Code §§ 236.2(a), (d), 708.2A(1) (2015). He admits an assault occurred.
The crux of Daniels’s argument is that he does not reside with his mother
because his trailer is merely located on the same property as his mother’s home
but is not, in fact, the same dwelling. He contends that his occasional use of his
parents’ home to shower and to sleep during winter months is insufficient to
prove that they resided together. We disagree.
The record in this case provides substantial evidence that supports the
jury’s verdict that Daniels resided with his mother, supporting the jury’s
conclusion that the requisite “resided with” requirement had been met. Daniels’s
father testified that during the winter of 2014-15, Daniels slept in their home
because it was too cold for Daniels to sleep in the unheated camping trailer. In
addition, in a recorded jail phone conversation played to the jury, Daniels was
heard to threaten his mother, saying, “I’m gonna be home to take care of you
soon.” (Emphasis added.) Having considered all of the record evidence in the
light most favorable to the State, including all reasonable inferences that may be
fairly drawn from the evidence, we conclude sufficient evidence supports his
conviction for domestic assault and uphold the verdict; we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.