DES MOINES – A Clear Lake man appealed his jail sentence stemming from a conviction on third degree theft, and lost.
Shawn Benedict Zimmerman appealed his conviction for theft in the third degree. He contended the district court failed to consider a sufficient number of factors during sentencing. Although the district court primarily relied upon Zimmerman’s criminal history, the Iowa Appeals Court found several sources of information, unrelated to his criminal record, were considered as part of his sentence.
On April 30, 2013, Zimmerman pled guilty to an amended charge of theft in the third degree. As part of the plea agreement, the State agreed to recommend a sentence of one year in the county jail with all but thirty days suspended and one year of supervised probation. Zimmerman was free to argue for any sentence for which he was eligible.
A sentencing hearing was held on June 3, 2013. During the hearing, the State recommended the sentence agreed upon in the plea bargain and discussed with the court Zimmerman’s extensive criminal history. Zimmerman explained he has a five-year old daughter for whom he is partially responsible and asked for a suspended sentence. The district court then personally questioned Zimmerman about his family responsibilities, employment, and education. The district court also discussed with Zimmerman his history of substance abuse and treatment, as well as any possible mental or physical health problems. Finally, after questioning Zimmerman about his criminal history, the court stated:
Okay. Well, given your criminal history, I am not willing to suspend the jail time in whole, but I do think that the State’s recommendation is appropriate. I don’t know that I need to have you serving in actual time more than 30 days unless you can’t follow through with the probation. So the State’s recommendation is adopted. I’ll order that you serve one year in Cerro Gordo County Jail, with all but 30 days suspended. The sentencing hearing then concluded.
Zimmerman’s sole argument on appeal is the district court impermissibly focused on a single factor, his criminal history, when imposing his sentence.
Zimmerman’s criminal history was the primary factor for the sentence;
however, after reviewing the record as a whole, the appeals court found the court inquired into and relied upon a number of other circumstances, including Zimmerman’s employment status, his education, the fact he has overcome a history of substance abuse, and his role and responsibilities as a father. Finding no abuse of discretion, the jail sentence was affirmed.
[poll random]
