IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 19-0617 Filed March 4, 2020 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. HIRAM ARIZMENDI, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, John J. Haney, Judge. Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for lascivious acts with a child. AFFIRMED. Nathan A. Olson of Branstad & Olson Law Office, Des Moines, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Genevieve Reinkoester, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ. 2 SCHUMACHER, Judge. Hiram Arizmendi appeals his conviction and sentence for lascivious acts with a child. The district court gave adequate reasons for Arizmendi’s sentence. We find the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Arizmendi to a term of imprisonment. The court did not rely on clearly untenable or unreasonable grounds for the sentence. We affirm Arizmendi’s conviction and sentence. I. Background Facts & Proceedings Arizmendi was charged with three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, in violation of Iowa Code section 709.3(1)(b) (2018), and two counts of lascivious acts with a child, in violation of section 709.8(1)(A). Arizmendi entered into a guilty plea in which he agreed to plead guilty to one count of lascivious acts with a child and the State agreed to dismiss the other charges. The parties were free to make their own sentencing recommendations. The court accepted Arizmendi’s guilty plea. At the sentencing hearing, victim impact statements were presented by the victim, who was nine years old, and the victim’s mother. The State requested Arizmendi be sentenced to ten years in prison. The defendant asserted that he had accepted responsibility for his action. He asked to be placed on probation. The presentence investigation report (PSI) recommended Arizmendi be sentenced to ten years in prison. The court sentenced Arizmendi to a term of imprisonment not to exceed ten years. Arizmendi now appeals, claiming the court abused its discretion in sentencing him to prison.1 1 Recent legislation “denies a defendant the right of appeal from a guilty plea, except for a guilty plea to a class ‘A’ felony or in a case where a defendant 3 II. Standard of Review We review a district court’s sentencing decision for the correction of errors at law. State v. Formaro, 638 N.W.2d 720, 724 (Iowa 2002). “We will not reverse the decision of the district court absent an abuse of discretion or some defect in the sentencing procedure.” Id. We will not find an abuse of discretion “unless we are able to discern that the decision was exercised on grounds or for reasons that were clearly untenable or unreasonable.” Id. Where a challenged sentence falls within the statutory parameters, this court presumes it valid and only overturns for an abuse of discretion or reliance on inappropriate factors. State v. Hopkins, 860 N.W.2d 550, 554 (Iowa 2015) (citing State v. Washington, 832 N.W.2d 650, 660 (Iowa 2013). III. Discussion Arizmendi argues the district court did not give adequate reasons for sentencing him to ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals