Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Amended August 21, 2014 Ned Chiodo v. The Section 43.24 Panel Consisting of: Secretary of State Matthew Schultz, Auditor of State Mary Mosiman and Attorney General Thomas Miller

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 15, 2014No. 14–0553Published

1ConcurrenceMansfield, J.

(specially concurring).

While I agree that Anthony Bisignano should not be disqualified from running for state senate, I cannot join the plurality opinion. I agree with the Panel, the district court, and Iowa’s elected representatives that felonies and only felonies are “infamous crimes” under article II, section 5 of the Iowa Constitution.

As the dissent correctly points out, the plurality throws out nearly a hundred years of this court’s precedents. Yet what is its replacement? That is hard to tell. *858Lacking a sound conceptual floor for its opinion, or a clear test, I think the plurality has…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Dunn v. BlumsteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Richardson v. RamirezSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. State of Iowa v. Dontay Dakwon SanfordSupreme Court of Iowa · 2012
  4. Madison v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Madison v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2007

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API