UPDATES & ANALYSIS

Prosecutor cannot be assessed a monetary penalty for misconduct, Iowa Supreme Court holds

by Rox Laird | June 5, 2025

A prosecutor cannot be monetarily sanctioned for misconduct in a criminal case, the Iowa Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision in response to what the Court said appeared to be an unprecedented sanction ordered by a district court. The decision in Christensen v. Iowa District Court for Story County was handed down May 30.

At the district court, the defendant in a drunk driving case filed a motion for sanctions against Assistant Story County Attorney Theron Christensen, claiming the prosecutor improperly moved to dismiss the case in an effort to cover up the arresting officer’s failure to recalibrate his radar in this and potentially other cases. The district court concluded Christensen had engaged in sanctionable conduct under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413 and Iowa Code Section 619.19 and assessed a $2,072 monetary sanction against him.

In opposing the district court’s monetary sanction, Christensen did not argue that such sanctions are not permitted by statute or court rules in criminal cases, nor did he make that argument in his appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court. That argument was, however, made in an amicus curiae brief filed with the Court by the Iowa Attorney General, which, while not a party in this case, weighed in because it supervises Iowa county attorneys.

Following its usual procedure, the Court would not have considered arguments not raised at the district court level or that were solely raised by amici curiae not party to the case. “But this case presents an exceptional situation in which we deem it necessary to reach the unpreserved argument,” Justice Matthew McDermott wrote for the Court.

Having reached that argument in this case, the Court held that the district court did not have the authority under state law or court rules to assess monetary sanctions against a prosecutor in a criminal case.

“In this case, for what appears to be the first time, a district court relied on Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413 and Iowa Code [Section] 619.19 to assess monetary sanctions against a prosecutor in a criminal case,” Justice McDermott wrote. “Although this rule and this statute give courts the power to impose monetary sanctions in civil cases, they confer no such power in criminal cases.”

Under Rule 1.413, a lawyer who signs a motion or other filing is certifying that he or she believes it to be accurate and legally justified and not submitted for any improper reason. If a lawyer violates the rule, “the court, upon motion or upon its own initiative, shall impose upon the person who signed it, a represented party, or both, an appropriate sanction ….”

Iowa Code Section 619.19 similarly authorizes “an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay the other party or parties the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the motion, pleading, or other paper, including a reasonable attorney fee.”

The Court held that both the rule and the statute apply to civil, not to criminal, cases.

“The rules governing civil procedure were never intended or designed to apply in criminal cases,” Justice McDermott wrote, adding that the Court long ago made that point clear in State v. Addison, 95 N.W.2d 744 (Iowa 1959). In Addison, the Court held that the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure have no application to criminal cases unless a statute makes them applicable. Justice McDermott further wrote that Iowa Code Section 619.19 does not apply in criminal proceedings either.

Justice McDermott quoted former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson who in 1940, when he was U.S. attorney general, wrote, “The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America,” thus “[w]hile the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficent forces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, he is one of the worst.” Justice McDermott wrote that, while criminal prosecutors are not governed by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413 or Iowa Code Section 619.19, they are nonetheless held accountable by “vigorous judicial oversight in the district court, appellate review, postconviction-relief proceedings, attorney disciplinary proceedings, human resource management, and elections.” Justice McDermott further wrote that prosecutors are also held accountable by the Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct, which say a prosecutor “has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate.”

Tags: Iowa Supreme Court 2024-25