Rich test in Iowa

2022Relevant here, second-degree kidnapping occurs “where the kidnapper is armed with a dangerous weapon, or where the victim is under eighteen years of age other than a kidnapping by a parent or legal guardian whose sole purpose of the kidnapping is to assume custody of a victim under eighteen years of age.” Id. § 710.3(1) Because many crimes involve some sort of confinement or removal of the victim, our case law has established that to satisfy the confinement or removal requirements of section 710.1, there must be “more than the confinement or removal that is an inherent incident of commission o

2022Relevant here, second-degree kidnapping occurs “where the kidnapper is armed with a dangerous weapon, or where the victim is under eighteen years of age other than a kidnapping by a parent or legal guardian whose sole purpose of the kidnapping is to assume custody of a victim under eighteen years of age.” Id. § 710.3(1) Because many crimes involve some sort of confinement or removal of the victim, our case law has established that to satisfy the confinement or removal requirements of section 710.1, there must be “more than the confinement or removal that is an inherent incident of commission o

2022Relevant here, second-degree kidnapping occurs “where the kidnapper is armed with a dangerous weapon, or where the victim is under eighteen years of age other than a kidnapping by a parent or legal guardian whose sole purpose of the kidnapping is to assume custody of a victim under eighteen years of age.” Id. § 710.3(1) Because many crimes involve some sort of confinement or removal of the victim, our case law has established that to satisfy the confinement or removal requirements of section 710.1, there must be “more than the confinement or removal that is an inherent incident of commission o

2022Relevant here, second-degree kidnapping occurs “where the kidnapper is armed with a dangerous weapon, or where the victim is under eighteen years of age other than a kidnapping by a parent or legal guardian whose sole purpose of the kidnapping is to assume custody of a victim under eighteen years of age.” Id. § 710.3(1) Because many crimes involve some sort of confinement or removal of the victim, our case law has established that to satisfy the confinement or removal requirements of section 710.1, there must be “more than the confinement or removal that is an inherent incident of commission o

2015State v. Finney, 834 N.W.2d 46, 62 (Iowa 2013).

2015State v. Finney, 834 N.W.2d 46, 62 (Iowa 2013).

2015Id. at 183 .

2015Id. at 183 .

2022See Albright, 925 N.W.2d at 155 (“Our kidnapping cases have generally held that the increased-risk-of-harm prong of the Rich test is satisfied when the duration of confinement substantially exceeded the underlying crime.”).

2022See Albright, 925 N.W.2d at 155 (“Our kidnapping cases have generally held that the increased-risk-of-harm prong of the Rich test is satisfied when the duration of confinement substantially exceeded the underlying crime.”).

2019See, e.g. , State v. Griffin , 564 N.W.2d 370 , 373 (Iowa 1997) (noting the defendant had the victim remove her clothing so that she would not leave the hotel room and she remained there the entire night after the assault); State v. McGrew , 515 N.W.2d 36 , 40 (Iowa 1994) (noting the victim did not escape from the defendant for more than four hours after he broke into her home and a considerable amount of time after the sexual assault ended).

2019See, e.g. , State v. Griffin , 564 N.W.2d 370 , 373 (Iowa 1997) (noting the defendant had the victim remove her clothing so that she would not leave the hotel room and she remained there the entire night after the assault); State v. McGrew , 515 N.W.2d 36 , 40 (Iowa 1994) (noting the victim did not escape from the defendant for more than four hours after he broke into her home and a considerable amount of time after the sexual assault ended).

2019See Robinson , 859 N.W.2d at 482 ; State v. Mead , 318 N.W.2d 440 , 445 (Iowa 1982) ; State v. Marr , 316 N.W.2d 176 , 180 (Iowa 1982). *154 In Marr , the defendant began following the victim while she was walking home from a drug store at ten in the evening.

2019See Robinson , 859 N.W.2d at 482 ; State v. Mead , 318 N.W.2d 440 , 445 (Iowa 1982) ; State v. Marr , 316 N.W.2d 176 , 180 (Iowa 1982). *154 In Marr , the defendant began following the victim while she was walking home from a drug store at ten in the evening.

2016See Ledezma v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134, 143 (Iowa 2001) (“Miscalculated trial strategies and mere mistakes in judgment normally do not rise to the level of ineffective assistance of counsel.”).

2016See Ledezma v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134, 143 (Iowa 2001) (“Miscalculated trial strategies and mere mistakes in judgment normally do not rise to the level of ineffective assistance of counsel.”).

2015Finney, 834 N.W.2d at 62 .1 “The record to support a factual basis for a guilty plea includes the minutes of testimony, statements made by the defendant and the prosecutor at the guilty plea proceedings, and the presentence investigation report.” State v. Keene, 630 N.W.2d 579, 581 (Iowa 2001).

2015Finney, 834 N.W.2d at 62 .1 “The record to support a factual basis for a guilty plea includes the minutes of testimony, statements made by the defendant and the prosecutor at the guilty plea proceedings, and the presentence investigation report.” State v. Keene, 630 N.W.2d 579, 581 (Iowa 2001).

2015Although the defendant’s pro se brief does not mention whether he is proceeding under the Iowa or the United States Constitution, I consider both claims preserved under the circumstances. 8 The defendant asserts although the jury instruction required the jury to find the confinement in the case had significance beyond the 7Jury instruction number 23 was adopted from Iowa State Bar Association (ISBA), Iowa Criminal Jury Instruction 1000.5 (2012). 8The proper treatment of such claims is discussed in State v. Halverson, 857 N.W.2d 632, 635 (Iowa 2015). 47 underlying sexual assault, the three-fact

2015Specifically, in order to support a kidnapping conviction, the confinement must “substantially increase[] the risk of harm . . . , significantly lessen[] the risk of detection, or significantly facilitate[] escape.” Id. at 745 (emphasis added).