State v. Blakley
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
LAVORATO, Justice.
In this discretionary review, we must decide whether the State’s motion to amend sentence to include restitution was untimely under Iowa Code section 910.3 (1993). The district court thought so and refused to allow the State’s requested amendment because it was filed some nine months after sentencing.
We conclude the district court erred in interpreting section 910.3. We reverse the district court’s order denying the State’s sentencing amendment. We remand for hearing on the defendant’s remaining objection to the State’s motion.
On the evening of February 26, 1993, Iowa City…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Krull v. THERMOGAS CO. OF NORTHWOOD IA.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1994
- State v. KluesnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1986
- Downing v. Iowa Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Iowa · 1987
- Meier v. Sac and Fox Indian TribeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
- In Re Property Seized From SopociSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. BlankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1997
- State v. MaiCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1997
- State v. RodgersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1997
- Barron v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1995
- State v. BradleyCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.