Legal Opinion

State v. Uthe

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 20, 1995No. 95-107PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The question in the present case is whether the district court has a duty to provide the department of corrections with an updated presentence investigation report after a defendant has noted inaccuracies in the report before the court. The defendant, Stephen Uthe, contends the district court has a duty to order a corrected presentenee report for use by the department of corrections after it is notified of inaccuracies. We do not believe the district court has such a duty and we affirm.

Uthe pleaded guilty to one count of forgery in violation of Iowa Code sections 715A.2(1) and 715A.2(2)(a)…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1992
  2. State v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1994

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. GrandberrySupreme Court of Iowa · 2000
  2. Campbell v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
  3. David Jay Nuno v. State of IowaCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2025
  4. State of Iowa v. Courtney Morgan AshbyCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API