Supreme Court of Iowa· 2/14/2001

State v. DeCamp

Citations

622 N.W.2d 290
2001 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 21
2001 WL 121110

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).

Judges: Cady

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.