UPDATES & ANALYSIS

Iowa Supreme Court determines second-offense enhancements made criminal sentence illegal for a defendant without a prior conviction under the relevant statute

by Mary Grace Henderson | July 28, 2025

In State v. Gale, the Iowa Supreme Court reviewed a woman’s second-offense sentences for marijuana and controlled-substance possession when it was actually the first time she had been convicted of these offenses. In this opinion written by Justice McDermott, a unanimous Iowa Supreme Court remanded the matter so the defendant could be resentenced. The Court also affirmed the holding of the Iowa Court of Appeals and Scott County District Court in part, finding the denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence was proper.

Defendant Vanessa Gale crossed paths with Romaro Houston at a Davenport convenience store. The pair then got into the defendant’s car, parking it by a gas pump. At that time, an undercover police officer was trailing Houston. Two additional police officers were traveling to place Houston under arrest. Ultimately, the exchange between the officers, Houston, and Gale resulted in the police searching Gale’s purse and person. This led to the discovery of “cash, four small tablets of methamphetamine, and about forty grams of marijuana.” Following Gale’s arrest, she was charged with one count of possession of marijuana and one count of possession of a controlled-substance pursuant to Iowa Code section 124.401(5).

The defendant moved to suppress the police-search evidence, which the district court denied. Eventually, the defendant agreed to a trial on the testimony minutes. Included in these minutes was the determination that Gale had a prior Iowa Code section 124.401(5) controlled-substance conviction. Neither party made an objection to these minutes.

“Predicate offenses,” which are prior convictions, “can enhance the sentence imposed for a later conviction” under Iowa Code section 124.401(5). Consequently, the district court placed upon Gale the obligation to pay a monetary fine for each conviction plus a surcharge, and it sentenced the defendant to two 120-day jail terms running concurrently. However, the jail time was suspended, and the defendant was given one-year of unsupervised probation. Gale’s sentence was selected in alignment with second-offense marijuana and controlled-substance possession laws.

However, the parties later acknowledged on appeal that Gale’s prior conviction under Iowa Code section 124.401(5), as documented in the minutes, was actually “from an online court summary that, it turns out, misstated the nature of Gale’s prior conviction.” On appeal, Gale asserted that her motion to suppress was improperly denied and that her sentence was illegal as her earlier conviction was not in fact a prior offense pursuant to Iowa Code section 124.401(5). The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the findings of the district court.

The Iowa Supreme Court granted further review solely on the issue of the defendant’s sentence.

Both parties eventually recognized that Gale’s prior conviction had actually been under a statute: Iowa Code section 155A.21. This statute prohibits pharmaceutical drug possession absent a prescription. However, the Court observed that Iowa Code section 124.401(5) does not include an Iowa Code section 155A.21 violation as a “predicate offense.”

As a result, both of the parties requested that the Iowa Supreme Court “supplement the record by taking judicial notice of the filings in the” earlier pharmaceutical conviction. Agreeing to review the judgment order from Gale’s previous conviction, the Iowa Supreme Court asserted that the conviction did “not constitute a predicate offense subjecting her to enhanced penalties under [Iowa Code section] 124.401(5).” Consequently, the Court held that Gale’s sentence for her Iowa Code section 124.401(5) convictions were illegal sentences and void. The Court tasked the district court with Gale’s resentencing.

Tags: Iowa Supreme Court 2024-25