misconduct violation (Iowa) · Go Syfert
← Iowa issues

misconduct violation in Iowa

12 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2025 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (10)

CaseFollowedCited
State of Iowa v. Zyriah Henry Floyd Schlittergreen
iowa · 2016 · cited in 3 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2016–2017
2 sentences

2017Whether the claim is one for prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial error, the defendant must establish the misconduct or error “resulted in prejudice to such an extent that the defendant was denied a fair trial.” Id.; see also Schlitter, 881 N.W.2d at 394 (concluding the Graves standard applies whether the claim is prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial error).

2017Whether the claim is one for prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial error, the defendant must establish the misconduct or error “resulted in prejudice to such an extent that the defendant was denied a fair trial.” Id.; see also Schlitter, 881 N.W.2d at 394 (concluding the Graves standard applies whether the claim is prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial error).

33
State v. Gravesgreen
iowa · 2003 · cited in 2 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2016–2025
2 sentences

2025See Graves, 668 N.W.2d at 869 .

2016“Evidence of the prosecutor’s bad faith is not necessary, as a trial can be unfair to the defendant even when the prosecutor has acted in good faith.” Graves, 668 N.W.2d at 869 . 10 Whether the claim is one for prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial error, the defendant must establish the misconduct or error “resulted in prejudice to such an extent that the defendant was denied a fair trial.” Id.; see also Schlitter, 881 N.W.2d at 394 (concluding the Graves standard applies whether the claim is prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial error).

12
Elizabeth H. Greenwell v. Employment Appeal Board and Professional Transportation, Inc.green
iowactapp · 2016 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021Appeal Bd., 879 N.W.2d 222, 228 (Iowa Ct. App. 27 2016) (concluding agency improperly applied law to fact in determining reoccurring acts of negligence satisfied the misconduct standard); cf. Sciacca, 2007 WL 2004531 , at *3 (concluding “the agency’s determination that [caretaker’s] actions constituted assault was not ‘irrational, illogical, or wholly unjustifiable’”).

11
United States v. Georgiagreen
scotus · 2006 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010See Garrett, 531 U.S. at 365 , 121 S.Ct. at 963 , 148 L.Ed.2d at 878 ; see also Georgia, 546 U.S. at 159 , 126 S.Ct. at 882 , 163 L.Ed.2d at 660 (remanding for district court to evaluate whether allegations were a constitutional violation, and if the misconduct was a violation of Title II but not the Constitution, ordering the court to still determine whether the abrogation was valid for that class of cases). .

2010See Garrett, 531 U.S. at 365 , 121 S.Ct. at 963 , 148 L.Ed.2d at 878 ; see also Georgia, 546 U.S. at 159 , 126 S.Ct. at 882 , 163 L.Ed.2d at 660 (remanding for district court to evaluate whether allegations were a constitutional violation, and if the misconduct was a violation of Title II but not the Constitution, ordering the court to still determine whether the abrogation was valid for that class of cases). .

11
NEW YORK STATE ASS'N, ETC. v. Careygreen
nyed · 1979 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010Examples cited by Lane include, New York State Ass’n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey, 466 F.Supp. 487, 504 (E.D.N.Y.1979) (documenting segregation of mentally disabled students with hepatitis B); Mills v. Bd. of Educ., 348 F.Supp. 866 (D.D.C.1972) (explaining the systemic exclusion of mentally disabled students from the public school system); Robertson v. Granite City Cmty. Unit Sch.

11
Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrettgreen
scotus · 2001 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010See Garrett, 531 U.S. at 365 , 121 S.Ct. at 963 , 148 L.Ed.2d at 878 ; see also Georgia, 546 U.S. at 159 , 126 S.Ct. at 882 , 163 L.Ed.2d at 660 (remanding for district court to evaluate whether allegations were a constitutional violation, and if the misconduct was a violation of Title II but not the Constitution, ordering the court to still determine whether the abrogation was valid for that class of cases). .

2010See Garrett, 531 U.S. at 365 , 121 S.Ct. at 963 , 148 L.Ed.2d at 878 ; see also Georgia, 546 U.S. at 159 , 126 S.Ct. at 882 , 163 L.Ed.2d at 660 (remanding for district court to evaluate whether allegations were a constitutional violation, and if the misconduct was a violation of Title II but not the Constitution, ordering the court to still determine whether the abrogation was valid for that class of cases). .

11
State v. Clarkgreen
haw · 1996 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004We conclude there is a logical theory of relevance to justify admission of evidence of the defendant’s prior misconduct under rule 404(6 ). 6 See Hulsey v. State, 866 So.2d *129 1180, 1190 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (admitting evidence of prior abuse against victim in defendant’s prosecution for assault and burglary, holding evidence was relevant to intent and motive); People v. McCray, 58 Cal.App.4th 159 , 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 872, 880 (1997) (holding evidence of past violence perpetrated on victim by defendant was clearly relevant to his intent to place victim in fear for her safety in prosecution for st

2004We conclude there is a logical theory of relevance to justify admission of evidence of the defendant’s prior misconduct under rule 404(6 ). 6 See Hulsey v. State, 866 So.2d *129 1180, 1190 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (admitting evidence of prior abuse against victim in defendant’s prosecution for assault and burglary, holding evidence was relevant to intent and motive); People v. McCray, 58 Cal.App.4th 159 , 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 872, 880 (1997) (holding evidence of past violence perpetrated on victim by defendant was clearly relevant to his intent to place victim in fear for her safety in prosecution for st

11
People v. McCraygreen
calctapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004We conclude there is a logical theory of relevance to justify admission of evidence of the defendant’s prior misconduct under rule 404(6 ). 6 See Hulsey v. State, 866 So.2d *129 1180, 1190 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (admitting evidence of prior abuse against victim in defendant’s prosecution for assault and burglary, holding evidence was relevant to intent and motive); People v. McCray, 58 Cal.App.4th 159 , 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 872, 880 (1997) (holding evidence of past violence perpetrated on victim by defendant was clearly relevant to his intent to place victim in fear for her safety in prosecution for st

2004We conclude there is a logical theory of relevance to justify admission of evidence of the defendant’s prior misconduct under rule 404(6 ). 6 See Hulsey v. State, 866 So.2d *129 1180, 1190 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (admitting evidence of prior abuse against victim in defendant’s prosecution for assault and burglary, holding evidence was relevant to intent and motive); People v. McCray, 58 Cal.App.4th 159 , 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 872, 880 (1997) (holding evidence of past violence perpetrated on victim by defendant was clearly relevant to his intent to place victim in fear for her safety in prosecution for st

11
State v. Sandersgreen
vt · 1998 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
1 sentence

2004We conclude there is a logical theory of relevance to justify admission of evidence of the defendant’s prior misconduct under rule 404(6 ). 6 See Hulsey v. State, 866 So.2d *129 1180, 1190 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (admitting evidence of prior abuse against victim in defendant’s prosecution for assault and burglary, holding evidence was relevant to intent and motive); People v. McCray, 58 Cal.App.4th 159 , 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 872, 880 (1997) (holding evidence of past violence perpetrated on victim by defendant was clearly relevant to his intent to place victim in fear for her safety in prosecution for st

11
State v. Dooleygreen
moctapp · 1993 · cited in 1 Iowa opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
1 sentence

2004We conclude there is a logical theory of relevance to justify admission of evidence of the defendant’s prior misconduct under rule 404(6 ). 6 See Hulsey v. State, 866 So.2d *129 1180, 1190 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) (admitting evidence of prior abuse against victim in defendant’s prosecution for assault and burglary, holding evidence was relevant to intent and motive); People v. McCray, 58 Cal.App.4th 159 , 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 872, 880 (1997) (holding evidence of past violence perpetrated on victim by defendant was clearly relevant to his intent to place victim in fear for her safety in prosecution for st

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Johnson green
iowa · 1989
2 sentences

2019The Johnston court stated, "When there is proof that extraneous material has reached the jury room, the party seeking reversal on a misconduct claim must prove 'that the misconduct was calculated to, and with reasonable probability did, influence the verdict.' " Id. at 35 (quoting Johnson , 445 N.W.2d at 342 ).

1991When there is proof that extraneous material has reached the jury room, the party seeking reversal on a misconduct claim must prove “that the misconduct was calculated to, and with reasonable probability did, influence the verdict.” Johnson, 445 N.W.2d at 342 .

21991–2019
Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Marcucci green
iowa · 1996
2 sentences

2009Id. at 881-83 .

2009Id. at 881-83 .

22009–2009
Urseth v. City of Dayton green
ohsd · 1987
1 sentence

2019The Johnston court cited with approval a federal case emphasizing that the court's task was to determine whether extraneous information would prejudice an "objective, 'typical juror.' " Id. (citing Urseth v. City of Dayton , 680 F. Supp. 1084 , 1089 (S.D.

12019–2019
Doe v. Johnston green
iowa · 1991
1 sentence

2019The Johnston court stated, "When there is proof that extraneous material has reached the jury room, the party seeking reversal on a misconduct claim must prove 'that the misconduct was calculated to, and with reasonable probability did, influence the verdict.' " Id. at 35 (quoting Johnson , 445 N.W.2d at 342 ).

12019–2019
State of Iowa v. Robert Paul Krogmann green
iowa · 2011
1 sentence

2017However, the court went on to address the merits of the misconduct claim and concluded the question was “inflammatory and improper” but “isolated” and not “so severe or pervasive that it affected Krogmann’s right to a fair trial.” Id.

12017–2017
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia green
dcd · 1972
1 sentence

2010Examples cited by Lane include, New York State Ass’n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey, 466 F.Supp. 487, 504 (E.D.N.Y.1979) (documenting segregation of mentally disabled students with hepatitis B); Mills v. Bd. of Educ., 348 F.Supp. 866 (D.D.C.1972) (explaining the systemic exclusion of mentally disabled students from the public school system); Robertson v. Granite City Cmty. Unit Sch.

12010–2010

Where else courts name it

CA 142 (1918–2026) NY 13 (1916–2022) IA 12 (1991–2025) PA 12 (2004–2025) TN 10 (1986–2024) MI 8 (1959–2025) MO 8 (1991–2022) OH 8 (2006–2026) IL 7 (1998–2017) WA 7 (1915–2017) KS 7 (1994–2020) MN 6 (1985–2016) CT 6 (1973–2004) TX 5 (1983–2013) OK 5 (1980–2014) AK 4 (2013–2025) DC 4 (2010–2017) FL 4 (1987–2023) IN 4 (1994–2025) MD 3 (1987–2000) UT 3 (1983–2017) NC 3 (2003–2020) AR 2 (2008–2010) NV 2 (2015–2015) HI 2 (1999–2012) SD 2 (1985–1993) CO 2 (2007–2022) OR 2 (1981–1994) SC 2 (2001–2015) WY 2 (1993–2016) DE 2 (2015–2019) VA 2 (1979–2015) AL 2 (1981–2010) MT 2 (1998–1999) AZ 2 (1997–2016)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check