Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 705.2 (2026)

Renunciation

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IA-LEGlegis.iowa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

It is a defense to a prosecution for solicitation that the defendant, after soliciting another person to commit a felony or aggravated misdemeanor, persuaded the person not to do so or otherwise prevented the commission of the offense, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of the defendant’s criminal intent. A renunciation is not “voluntary and complete” if it is motivated in whole or in part by either of the following:

1. The person’s belief that circumstances exist which increase the possibility of detection or apprehension of the defendant or another or which make more difficult the consummation of the offense.

2. The person’s decision to postpone the offense until another time or to substitute another victim or another but similar objective. [C79, 81, §705.2] 2013 Acts, ch 90, §222 Referred to in §707.3A\n\nTue Dec 09 21:56:45 2025 Iowa Code 2026, Chapter 705 (19, 0) \n

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1966–1982 · leading case: State v. Pilcher.
State v. Pilcher (Iowa 1976). · cites it 4× “The demurrer, which was overruled, alleged the sodomy statute is unconstitutional in these respects: (1) it is an improper exercise of the police power; (2) it violates the due process and equal protection clauses; (3) it is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad; (4) it invades…”
State v. Williams (Iowa 1982). · cites it 2× “Less serious misdemeanors were thus omitted from the statute's coverage, a provision was added requiring corroboration of intent by clear and convincing evidence, and a separate provision for renunciation was added, see § 705.2, The Code. 4 Iowa Practice, supra, at § 102.”
State v. Polton (Iowa 1966). · cites it 2× “Defendant pleaded not guilty, was tried, found guilty by a jury, and sentenced to the penitentiary for not more than ten years as provided by section 705.2. The three errors assigned on this appeal are all based on the receipt of testimony of police officers Backstrom and Warren…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.