When used in this chapter:
1. “Appropriated receipts” means receipts that have been appropriated by the general
assembly.
2. “Block grant” means funds from the federal government awarded in broad program
\n
Tue Dec 09 22:34:24 2025 Iowa Code 2026, Chapter 8 (112, 1)
3 DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT — BUDGET AND FINANCIAL CONTROL ACT, §8.3\n\nareas within which the state is given considerable latitude in determining how funds are
used and for which the state develops its own plan for spending according to general federal
guidelines. “Block grant” does not include education research grants.
3. “Budget” means the budget document required by this chapter to be transmitted to the
general assembly.
4. “Categorical grant” means federal funds applied for and received by the state which are
in the form of entitlements, formula grants, discretionary grants, open-ended entitlements,
or another form that may be used only for specific, narrowly defined activities, except funds
for student aid and assistance; grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements for research
and training for which no appropriated matching funds are required; and reimbursements
for services rendered.
5. “Custodial funds” means those funds from various deposits, taxes, or other means that
are properly collected from, held for, and distributed to individuals, private organizations,
and other governments as provided by law.
6. The terms “department and establishment” and “department or establishment” mean
any executive department, commission, board, institution, bureau, office, or other agency
of the state government, by whatever name called, that uses, expends, or receives any
government funds, including the state department of transportation, except for funds that
are required to match federal aid allotted to the state by the federal government for highway
special purposes, but excluding the courts and the general assembly.
7. “General fund” means the general fund of the state established pursuant to section
444.21.
8. “Government” means the government of the state of Iowa.
9. “Government funds” means all moneys appropriated by the general assembly, or
moneys collected by or for the state, or a department or establishment of the state, pursuant
to authority granted by law.
10. “Private purpose trust funds” means trust arrangements under which the principal and
income benefit individuals, private organizations, or other governments. “Private purpose
trust funds” does not include pension or other employee benefit trust funds or investment
trust funds.
11. “Special revenue fund” means any and all government fees and other revenue receipts
earmarked to finance a governmental agency to which a general fund appropriation is not
made by the state.
12. “Unencumbered balance” means the unobligated balance of an appropriation after
charging to the appropriation all unpaid liabilities for goods and services and all contracts or
agreements payable from the appropriation.
[C35, §84-e2; C39, §84.02; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §8.2; 81 Acts, ch 17,
§1]
2020 Acts, ch 1063, §2; 2024 Acts, ch 1185, §1
Referred to in §8A.125, 8A.502, 10A.107, 10A.503, 10A.506, 10A.801, 10A.902, 16.81, 20.33, 22.3A, 29C.8, 35D.7, 35D.18, 68A.405A,
80B.15, 84A.5, 99D.22, 99E.5, 100B.4, 100C.9, 100D.7, 124.553, 124E.10, 124E.19, 135C.7, 135Q.2, 135Q.3, 135Q.4, 135R.3, 136C.10, 147A.6,
155A.40, 162.2B, 203.9, 203C.2, 215A.9, 222.92, 226.9B, 252B.4, 252B.5, 252B.23, 262.9, 272C.6, 321.491, 325A.5, 421.17, 423.2A, 475A.6,
477C.7, 505.7, 523A.501, 523A.502, 524.207, 533.111, 543D.22, 543E.20
\n
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
27
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case:
State v. Lane, 726 N.W.2d 371 (Iowa 2007).
State v. Lane, 726 N.W.2d 371 (Iowa 2007).
· cites it 24× “LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 50-141 (4th ed.2004) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing the validity of consent).”
State of Iowa v. Robert Dale Lowe, Jr., 812 N.W.2d 554 (Iowa 2012).
· cites it 12× “See generally 4 LaFave, § 8.2, at 50–141 (discussing several factors bearing upon the validity of consent).”
State v. Reinier, 628 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 2001).
· cites it 10× “LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 634-713 (3d ed.1996) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing factors bearing upon the validity of consent).”
Bd. of Water Works Trs. of the City of Des Moines, Iowa v. Sac Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, as Tr. of Drainage Districts 32, 42, 65, 79, 81, 83, 86, & Calhoun Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors & Sac Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors as Jt. Trs. of Drainage Districts 2 & 51 & Buena Vista Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors & Sac Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors as Jt. Trs. of Drainage Districts 19, 890 N.W.2d 50 (Iowa 2017).
· cites it 6× “Malone, Riparian Rights, Environmental Regulation of Land Use § 8.2, Westlaw LWATRR (database updated Nov.”
State of Iowa v. Randall Lee Pals, 805 N.W.2d 767 (Iowa 2011).
· cites it 4× “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 8.2, at 51 (4th ed. 2004). Professor LaFave sees the same problem in the context of the Fourth Amendment in light of “the inherent ambiguity” of the Schneckloth test.”
Farrell v. State Bd. of Regents, 179 N.W.2d 533 (Iowa 1970).
· cites it 14× “By the enactment of chapter 181, Sixty-Third General Assembly however, that part of student tuitions, fees and institutional income to be separated and employed for bond retirement is, as previously disclosed, thereby made a special fund, thus permitting use thereof for…”
State of Iowa v. Isaac Andrew Baldon III, 829 N.W.2d 785 (Iowa 2013).
· cites it 2× “LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 8.2(b), at 66, 81–90 (5th ed. 2012) [hereinafter LaFave].”
Rants v. Vilsack, 684 N.W.2d 193 (Iowa 2004).
· cites it 2× “1, §§ 78, 80, 81, 85,106 (extraordinary session); see also Iowa Code § 8.2 (2) (discussing the nature of budgetary authority).”
State v. Garcia, 461 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 1990).
· cites it 3× “LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 194-95 (2d ed. 1987). The fact that the consent to search extended to defendant’s motel room as well as his car is also significant.”
Whalen v. Connelly, 593 N.W.2d 147 (Iowa 1999).
· cites it 6× “Authority supporting appointment of the special committee by the PRC-Iowa board is found in section 8.2 of the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of TCG which states in pertinent part: [T]he General Partners shall have the exclusive right to manage the…”
In Re Caslavka, 179 B.R. 141 (Bankr. D. Iowa 1995).
· cites it 2× “Section 8.2 states that upon termination of the Plan by the employer, complete distribution of the assets shall be made in a manner consistent with Section 6.”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(3) — 1 case
— Iowa Code § 8.2(9) — 2 cases
— Iowa Code § 8.2(E) — 1 case
— Iowa Code § 8.2(b) — 4 cases
State v. Lane, 726 N.W.2d 371 (Iowa 2007).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 50-141 (4th ed.2004) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing the validity of consent).”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(c) — 2 cases
State v. Lane, 726 N.W.2d 371 (Iowa 2007).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 50-141 (4th ed.2004) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing the validity of consent).”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(d) — 3 cases
State v. Lane, 726 N.W.2d 371 (Iowa 2007).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 50-141 (4th ed.2004) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing the validity of consent).”
State v. Reinier, 628 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 2001).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 634-713 (3d ed.1996) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing factors bearing upon the validity of consent).”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(e) — 2 cases
State v. Lane, 726 N.W.2d 371 (Iowa 2007).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 50-141 (4th ed.2004) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing the validity of consent).”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(f) — 2 cases
— Iowa Code § 8.2(g) — 2 cases
State v. Reinier, 628 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 2001).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 634-713 (3d ed.1996) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing factors bearing upon the validity of consent).”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(i) — 2 cases
State of Iowa v. Randall Lee Pals, 805 N.W.2d 767 (Iowa 2011).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment § 8.2, at 51 (4th ed. 2004). Professor LaFave sees the same problem in the context of the Fourth Amendment in light of “the inherent ambiguity” of the Schneckloth test.”
— Iowa Code § 8.2(n) — 2 cases
State v. Reinier, 628 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 2001).
“LaFave, Search and Seizure § 8.2, at 634-713 (3d ed.1996) [hereinafter LaFave] (discussing factors bearing upon the validity of consent).”
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.