Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2024 3 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. McDowellgreen2 sentences2022Under section 724.26(1), “A person who is convicted of a felony in a state or federal court, . . . and who knowingly has under the person’s dominion and control or possession . . . a firearm or offensive weapon is guilty of a class “D” felony.” “[I]mmediate possession of a firearm means actual possession on one’s person.” State v. McDowell, 622 N.W.2d 305, 307 (Iowa 2001) (citation omitted). “[I]mmediate control of a firearm may be established by showing that the defendant was in such close proximity to the weapon as to claim immediate dominion over it.” Id. (citation omitted). [W]here the acc 2022Under section 724.26(1), “A person who is convicted of a felony in a state or federal court, . . . and who knowingly has under the person’s dominion and control or possession . . . a firearm or offensive weapon is guilty of a class “D” felony.” “[I]mmediate possession of a firearm means actual possession on one’s person.” State v. McDowell, 622 N.W.2d 305, 307 (Iowa 2001) (citation omitted). “[I]mmediate control of a firearm may be established by showing that the defendant was in such close proximity to the weapon as to claim immediate dominion over it.” Id. (citation omitted). [W]here the acc | 2 | 4 |
State of Iowa v. Donald Benjamin Earl Reedgreen2 sentences2024In State v. Reed, 875 N.W.2d 693, 708 (Iowa 2016), the court held that “[b]oth statutes require proof of actual or constructive possession.” 12 proximity to the weapon as to claim immediate dominion over it’ and that he had ‘knowledge of the presence of the firearm.’”5 Id. at 708 (citation omitted). 2024In State v. Reed, 875 N.W.2d 693, 708 (Iowa 2016), the court held that “[b]oth statutes require proof of actual or constructive possession.” 12 proximity to the weapon as to claim immediate dominion over it’ and that he had ‘knowledge of the presence of the firearm.’”5 Id. at 708 (citation omitted). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Eickelberggreen2 sentences2001These are: (1) Based on State v. Eickelberg, 574 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Iowa 1997), immediate possession of a firearm means actual possession on one’s person. (2) Also based on Eickelberg , immediate control of a firearm may be established by showing that the defendant was in such close proximity to the weapon as to claim immediate dominion over it. 2001These are: (1) Based on State v. Eickelberg, 574 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Iowa 1997), immediate possession of a firearm means actual possession on one's person. (2) Also based on Eickelberg , immediate control of a firearm may be established by showing that the defendant was in such close proximity to the weapon as to claim immediate dominion over it. | 1 | 2 |
People v. Daniel Jonesgreen2 sentences1974See People v. Jones, 37 Mich.App. 91, 93 , 194 N.W.2d 433, 435 . 1974See People v. Jones, 37 Mich.App. 91, 93 , 194 N.W.2d 433, 435 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hill
green
2 sentences1976In State v. Watts, 223 N.W.2d 234 (Iowa 1974), at page 239 we said: “The subjective reasons for the concealment of the knife on defendant’s person, or for its intended use, are of course questions for the jury; but subjective intent to carry the knife as a weapon would have to arise inferentially from the objective facts such as the time and place the defendant was found in possession of the instrument, the manner in which it was concealed on his person, or other facts which would indicate the defendant intended to use the instrument as a weapon of defense or assault.” (citations), (emphasis s 1976In State v. Watts, 223 N.W.2d 234 (Iowa 1974), at page 239 we said: “The subjective reasons for the concealment of the knife on defendant’s person, or for its intended use, are of course questions for the jury; but subjective intent to carry the knife as a weapon would have to arise inferentially from the objective facts such as the time and place the defendant was found in possession of the instrument, the manner in which it was concealed on his person, or other facts which would indicate the defendant intended to use the instrument as a weapon of defense or assault.” (citations), (emphasis s | 1 | 1976–1976 |
State v. Watts
green
1 sentence1976In State v. Watts, 223 N.W.2d 234 (Iowa 1974), at page 239 we said: “The subjective reasons for the concealment of the knife on defendant’s person, or for its intended use, are of course questions for the jury; but subjective intent to carry the knife as a weapon would have to arise inferentially from the objective facts such as the time and place the defendant was found in possession of the instrument, the manner in which it was concealed on his person, or other facts which would indicate the defendant intended to use the instrument as a weapon of defense or assault.” (citations), (emphasis s | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.