State v. DeCamp

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding “[i]neffective assistance of counsel claims presented on direct appeal are typically preserved for postconviction relief proceedings to all for a full development of the facts surrounding the conduct of counsel”
• discussing the principle that statutes are presumed to apply only prospectively
• disavowing Tornquist to the extent it used a prospective application analysis on the ground that “the issue of enhanced sentencing based on prior convictions is outside the scope of the principles which apply to the prospective or retrospective application of a statute”
• “In the absence of clear legislative intent, we turn to the rules of statutory construction.” (citing State v. Perez, 563 N.W.2d 625, 628 (Iowa 1997))
• “[O]ur first task is to look to the language of the statute to determine the legislative intent.”
• “The effective date of the enhanced sentencing provisions gives the offender notice his future acts will be subject to enhanced punishment based on the prior convictions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).