Stowers & NelsenStowers & Nelsen2025-07-08T08:47:39Zhttps://www.stowerslaw.com/feed/atom/WordPressOn Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Gun Rights Restoration – Iowa]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474472024-01-31T11:30:54Z2024-01-03T13:19:38ZWho is prohibited from owning a gun under federal law?
The answer to this question has become increasingly unclear in the wake of the landmark decision in New York Rifle and Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen :: 597 U.S. ___ (2022) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center) , which was decided by the United States Supreme Court in June of 2022. Since that time, a flood of litigation nationwide has followed to determine what the answer is.
Generally, both federal law and Iowa law affect who can own a gun. Under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 922(g) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922), any person who has been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year (i.e. a felony) cannot lawfully possess a firearm. Section 922 also excludes several other classes of persons from possessing firearms, including:
fugitives from justice;
unlawful users of controlled substances;
those adjudicated as mentally defective, or committed to a mental institution;
illegal or unlawful aliens;
those who have received a dishonorable discharge from the Armed Forces; those who are subject to certain no-contact orders; and
those convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
But under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(20) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921) a “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” does not include State offenses classified by State law as misdemeanors and punishable by imprisonment of two years or less. It also does not include certain white collar crimes. The Supreme Court is set to weigh in on the issue again in the coming months in United States v. Rahimi (United States v. Rahimi - SCOTUSblog) where the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 922(8) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922), which disallows firearm possession by persons subject to a no contact order, has been called in to constitutional question.
Currently, offenses classified as felonies always result in the loss of gun rights, with the exception of a few white collar crimes. But if you’ve been convicted of an aggravated misdemeanor in Iowa you are not necessarily prohibited from owning a gun. This is where Iowa law comes into play.
Who is prohibited from owning a gun under Iowa law?
To get your gun rights back in Iowa, you need to file an application with the Governor’s office. There may also be remedies which can be pursued in the court system as well, depending upon your circumstances. It’s important to have an experienced attorney handle the process for you. Give us a call at 515-224-7446 (https://www.stowerslaw.com) and we will help you get it started. We offer an initial consultation regarding restoration of gun rights to determine eligibility at a cost of $150.
This blog post is meant to be informative only and should not be construed as any form of legal advice; nor does it establish an attorney-client relationship. If you have questions about whether you are eligible to possess a firearm or own a gun, you should always speak with a lawyer personally.]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Illegal search by police uncovered by Stowers & Nelsen | Case Dismissed]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474492024-01-26T13:42:40Z2022-08-09T12:39:47Zhttp://stowerslaw.com) has again obtained a complete dismissal of criminal drug charges after uncovering an illegal search conducted by law enforcement. This is the latest achievement in a long line of winning evidence suppression motions that the firm is well-known for.
The Illegal Search
In this case, a state trooper followed our client in her vehicle through downtown Des Moines under the premise of her car registration being expired. However, instead of pulling her over immediately he watched her park and enter a building to run an errand for about 10 minutes before confronting her when she returned to her vehicle. As he interrogated her at her car door he claimed to smell a faint odor of marijuana drifting out of the car. Based upon this, he declared that he had probable cause to conduct an invasive search of the vehicle. After a search of the vehicle and her person, the trooper found a few expired prescription pills in her purse, but never found any marijuana. Nevertheless, the State proceeded to charge her with unlawful possession of a prescription drug, which is a serious misdemeanor in Iowa punishable by up to one year in prison.
Case Dismissed
Our attorneys took a look at the case and knew something seemed off. First, even though the trooper claimed to smell marijuana they did not find any in the vehicle. Second, our client’s purse had not been left in the car but kept on her when she was running her errand, so there was no reason to search it if the smell was in fact emanating from the vehicle. Based upon the facts of this case, we felt the search violated Article I, section 8 of Iowa Constitution (http://publications.iowa.gov/9883/1/CONSTITUTION_OF_THE_STATE_OF_IOWA.pdf) and the Fourth Amendment to the Untied States Constitution (https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-4/). We filed a motion to completely suppress any evidence uncovered by the illegal search upon her vehicle and person. After we filed the motion the State never even took the time to file a formal resistance: the prosecutor examined the case and agreed that the evidence was obtained in violation of our client’s constitutional rights. He dismissed the case entirely. Instead of having to deal with the headache of criminal proceedings our client walked out of the courthouse a free woman, with nothing hanging over her head. Our careful examination of the evidence and strategic action in the case kept her from a conviction that would have stayed on her record for life, affecting her job, family, and reputation.
Have you been the subject of an illegal search by the police? Are you worried about how criminal charges could affect you and your future? At Stowers & Nelsen (http://stowerslaw.com), we have decades of experience advising our clients and obtaining outcomes for them such as happened in this case. Give our firm a call at 515- 224-7446 (https://www.stowerslaw.com/contact/) to see if we can help you!]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Eyewitness Misidentification]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474422024-01-31T11:18:03Z2022-05-04T11:56:46Zhttps://casetext.com/case/state-v-folkerts-1) that the convictions of approximately seventy-five percent of innocent persons involved mistaken eyewitnesses’ identifications. Subsequent research has continued to question the reliability of eyewitnesses’ identifications. For example, in 2011, the American Psychological Association observed that controlled experiments and studies showed that the rate of incorrect identifications was approximately thirty-three percent.
However, police continue to rely heavily on eyewitnesses’ identifications. This practice has dramatic consequences (http://www.iowainnocence.org/eyewitnessmisidentification) for suspects. For example, if an eyewitness misidentifies a person during the investigation of a crime, police often focus all their effort on that person and stop searching for other possible suspects to the crime. This has significant negative effects, leading to trouble for the wrongfully identified suspect, while also leaving the actual perpetrator on the streets.
At trials, jurors also give great weight to eyewitness testimony, and often tend to over credit eyewitnesses. Not surprisingly, jurors have found innocent people guilty based only on a single witness’s mistaken identification testimony. As a result, a confident eyewitness who incorrectly identified a defendant, but was persuasive in court, can completely change the outcome of the trial.
If you have been identified as a suspect, you should immediately contact us (/contact/) at 515-224-7446 for assistance. You need attorneys who will zealously challenge eyewitness identification testimony. Stowers and Nelsen (http://stowerslaw.com) has extensive experience in this area, and we are ready to defend you!]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Judge throws out felony drug case after client retains Stowers & Nelsen]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474512024-01-26T13:49:28Z2021-09-04T12:46:37ZFelony Marijuana Distribution Charges
Dean Stowers and Peter Ickes successfully argued a motion to suppress evidence obtained during a vehicle search, resulting in dismissal of the prosecution. Our client was driving a rental vehicle with New Jersey plates on Interstate 80 in Dallas County when Iowa State Patrol Trooper Spencer Baltes pulled him over for allegedly following too closely. The trooper said he would only issue a warning if the client’s driver’s license came back valid, yet he directed our client to sit in his patrol car. Trooper Baltes admitted this was done for the purpose of conducting a “motorist interview” designed to determine if our client was traveling for a “lawful purpose,” as part of the trooper’s interdiction training.
While in the squad car, the trooper asked detailed questions about our client’s travel plans and destination, and googled various information to check out our client’s travel statements. This questioning and searching was determined to have extended the stop for following to closely by many minutes. After all this questioning and internet searching, the Trooper claimed he had cause to further detain our client for a drug dog to arrive. Some 50 minutes later a dog arrived and reacted to the odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle which contained perhaps 30 pounds. Our client was arrested and held in jail for 6 days prior to being bonded out.
This is the fourth case in the last several years where our office has turned back the Iowa State Patrol’s illegal interdiction practices during routine stops, yet they continue to violate what is now settled law rejecting these practices. The law is clear that an officer violates a motorist’s rights when they prolong a stop for a routine traffic violation in an attempt to develop a further basis to detain the person. Police are required to complete the basis of the stop in an expeditious manner and to not expand their stop into other investigative inquiries that prolong the stop unless they have first developed reasonable suspicion to do so.
The court ordered that all evidence obtained as a result of the unlawful prolongation of the stop be thrown excluded as it was illegally procured. Without any admissible evidence, the state was forced to dismiss its case, and our client walked out of the courtroom as if he was never charged at all.
If you or anyone you know has been charged with a crime arising from a search of a vehicle stopped during a routine traffic stop, no other lawyer or law firm has more expertise and proven results in these types of cases than Stowers & Nelsen (http://stowersnelsen.com). Call Stowers & Nelsen at 515-224-7446, so we can help.]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Dean Stowers Recognized as Top 1%]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474382024-01-26T12:29:51Z2020-09-03T11:23:48Zhttps://www.americanregistry.com/individual/dean-a-stowers/378426) as one of America’s Most Honored Lawyers. Dean is considered to be among the top 1% of all attorneys nationwide for 2020. Dean Stowers Recognized as Top 1% Attorney September 3, 2020
America’s Most Honored is an award issued by American Registry derived from the most recognized individuals and businesses in their repository of millions. The award is granted to those who consistently have numerous awards, year over year, landing them in the top percentile.
Dean’s primarily practices in criminal defense, consistently obtaining the best results for all his clients. He has had decades of success suppressing evidence, winning at trial, and arguing appeals in front of both state and federal courts. From drug and sex crimes to homicides and assaults, Dean has done it all. He is an aggressive and effective advocate for his clients in every case.
This latest award only proves that if you have been charged with a crime, there’s no one better equipped to defend you than Dean. Call Stowers & Nelsen (https://stowerslaw.com/) at 515-224-7446 to speak with him and find out how he can help you successfully confront your charges.]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Deferred Judgment in Iowa]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474392024-01-26T12:36:50Z2020-08-03T11:30:20ZWhat is a deferred judgment?
Under Iowa Code Section 907.3 (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/907.3.pdf), a deferred judgment is a special adjudication where, after the defendant enters a guilty plea or jury gives a guilty verdict, the court defers judgment and puts the defendant on probation. If the defendant successfully completes probation the criminal case records are expunged under Section 907.9 (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/907.9.pdf). Expunged cases are considered confidential records under Section 22.7 (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/22.7.pdf). They are only accessible to the defendant, defendant’s attorney, or someone with a signed waiver from the defendant. In essence, in these cases the Court does not accept the guilty plea or proceed to criminal sentencing. Jail time is not part of the adjudication, but you are still required to pay a fine and serve probation. A deferred judgment does not generally count as a conviction, although there are some exceptions to that rule.
Many people think an expungement means that the case record is never accessible to anyone, but that is not true. As a confidential record, access is limited, but it still can show up on a background check if the inquirer has a signed waiver from the defendant.
What happens if my probation gets revoked?
If you breach the conditions of your probation, your probation officer might recommend that the court revoke your probation and deferred judgment. When this happens, you lose your deferred judgment and the court enters a conviction against you. It becomes as if you were originally convicted and you may be required to serve time in jail or prison.
Am I eligible for a deferred judgment?
Iowa law provides that a person is eligible for two deferred judgments in their lifetime. In practice, the second one is left almost entirely to the discretion of the Court. Both felonies and misdemeanors are eligible for a deferred judgment. However, certain crimes, like drunk driving (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/321J.2.pdf) with a BAC over 0.15 or failure to register as a sex offender (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/692A.111.pdf), are never eligible. Because a deferred judgment does not generally count as a conviction, it can be a great option for many defendants. Additionally, expungement of the record means the defendant can protect their reputation by successfully completing probation.
If you’ve been charged with a crime a skillful lawyer can make the difference between getting a conviction or deferred judgement. Here at Stowers & Nelsen (http://www.stowerslaw.com), we have successfully negotiated deferred judgments for everything from misdemeanors to felonies. Give us a call at 515-224-7446 and see if we can help you avoid a conviction!]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Federal Drug Defense Results in Complete Victory]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474442024-01-26T13:10:30Z2020-07-24T12:07:32ZThe Illegal Traffic Stop
In November 2018 a client of our office was driving through Syracuse, Nebraska on Highway 2 with two friends in a large motor home with California plates. A Nebraska State Trooper took an interest in the vehicle as it drove toward the Iowa border, called ahead to Fremont County Iowa Deputy Zach Buttercase, who has a drug detection dog, to see if he could stop the RV and deploy his dog. Deputy Buttercase then called fellow Deputy Austin Richardson to join the pursuit.
After the RV turned south onto I29 and drove for about 6 miles, Deputy Richardson pulled the RV over, claiming he had witnessed it touch or cross the shoulder line and the lane divider. The conditions were windy and slick, and several vehicles had been towed from ditches that night due to winter storm conditions. After stopping the RV, Deputy Buttercase was on scene to deploy his dog and it allegedly alerted to a narcotics odor by sitting. A search uncovered a large quantity of marijuana and prosecution for a federal drug case followed.
The client reported that he had not touched or crossed the lines as claimed, was unaware of any officer following him for miles prior to the stop, and the others with him asserted the drug dog never sat as was claimed by Deputy Buttercase. The client even testified that he overheard Deputy Buttercase later joking that his dog never sat.
The Motion to Suppress
Dean Stowers (https://stowerslaw.com/attorney/stowers-dean/) moved to suppress (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/motion_to_suppress#:~:text=Definition%20from%20N olo's%20Plain%2DEnglish,violation%20of%20the%20defendant's%20rights.) the evidence obtained as a result of the stop and alleged dog alert contending that the stop was baseless and that the alert never happened. The government claimed in its resistance that Deputy Richardson was following the RV on Highway 2 and continued to follow it on I29 south whereupon he observed the alleged violations.
Dean pursued discovery and the government prosecutor and Fremont County Sheriff’s Office aggressively resisted. Specifically, Dean sought the GPS location data for the two sheriff vehicles. The Sheriff’s Office and US Attorney claimed no such GPS data existed, but they did produce some limited information concerning speed and odometer readings from their vehicle from a software called Network fleet. That data showed that Deputy Richardson had been behind Deputy Butter case when the RV turned south from Highway 2 onto Highway 29 and had accelerated up to 112 mph to catch up to and pass Deputy Butter case and follow the RV a short distance before stopping it.
At the initial suppression hearing, the government claimed the odometer and speed data was unreliable and should be discounted in favor of the testimony of the deputies who claimed Richardson had followed the RV for several miles before pulling it over and before his video camera began recording the RV driving well within the lane lines. The court accepted the government’s argument and discounted the odometer and speed data in favor of the testimony of the officers. The motion to suppress was denied.
Illegally Withheld Evidence
After the hearing was concluded, Dean did not quit investigating because he was convinced the Fremont County Sheriff’s Office had not been telling the truth about the existence of the GPS location data. Subpoenas for the data from Network fleet were issued and the data was eventually produced after the government continued to try to quash the GPS data they had been ordered to produce. Dean then hired a civil engineer to reconstruct the locations of the two deputies and their speeds and plot where they and the RV would have been at the key roadway segments. That report was then used to reopen the hearing.
A Complete Victory
At the reopened hearing the court heard the evidence and agreed with the defense expert that the testimony of the two deputies concerning where they were was untrue and that Deputy Richardson could not have observed the alleged driving of the RV where he claimed to have observed violations. The court granted the motion to suppress and the government voluntarily dismissed the case in June 2020.
This case is a good example of the never stop, never give up, attitude we at Stowers and Nelsen (http://stowerslaw.com) have on cases. Even when all seemed lost, the fight continued to a complete victory that was so overwhelming that the US attorney’s office could not even pursue an appeal.
If you or a family member or friend believe you have been subjected to an illegal search and seizure by the police or are charged with a federal drug crime, please call the offices of Stowers and Nelsen and we can handle the matter successfully]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Another Win Against the Iowa Sex Offender Registry]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474362024-11-18T02:51:05Z2020-06-04T11:05:04ZWrongfully placed on the sex offender registry
Our client came into our office having been on the sex offender registry for 15 years. He faced charges for failure to register as a sex offender for the second time under Iowa Code Section 692A.111 (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/692A.111.pdf), a Class D felony (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/902.9.pdf). A conviction would lead to a mandatory lifetime (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/692A.106.pdf) on the registry. He didn’t know what to do. Over the past 15 years, several attorneys had looked at his case, but little had been done to help him. That’s where we came in.
What we did to get him off the registry
The first thing Dean (https://www.stowerslaw.com/About/Dean-Stowers.shtml) did was go back and examine the original offense that led to the registration requirement. It turns out that the original conviction specifically stated that he would not have to register as a sex offender. We saw clearly that he was unjustly required to register. From that point, we were determined to not only deal with the pending charges, but get him removed from the registry entirely. So we got to work. First, we got the county attorney to agree to postpone the pending case for 90 days (called a continuance). Then we got to work getting our client off the registry. We filed an application for determination (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2016/692A.116.pdf) with the Iowa Department of Public Safety (https://dps.iowa.gov/) (DPS). These applications are rarely successful, but they are often required in order to bring a later lawsuit against the state. DPS hemmed and hawed about the application, but eventually saw the merit in our argument. The Iowa Commissioner of Public Safety himself signed off on it. And just like that, our client no longer had to register as a sex offender. After dealing with 15 years of social stigma and onerous registration requirements, he was free to take his life back. With the decision from DPS in hand, we went to the county attorney and argued for him to dismiss the pending case. He was unwilling at first, but we held our ground. A charge for failing to register as a sex offender didn’t make sense if our client didn’t have to register anymore. Finally, the county attorney conceded and dismissed all the charges. Our client didn’t even have to pay court costs, which is very uncommon.
How we can help you
This client walked into our office facing felony charges and a lifetime on the sex offender registry. We took the case and completely changed his life. Let us take a look at your case, too. The social stigma surrounding sex offenders is immense. Some people say the requirement to register is worse than any amount of time spent in jail. At Stowers & Nelsen (https://www.stowerslaw.com/), we understand that you’re more than just the label of “sex offender” – you’re a real person. There are several ways to get off the sex offender registry in Iowa, and we have a lot of experience and success with all of them. Give us a call at 515-224-7446 (We might be able to change your life.]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Domestic Abuse Assault in Iowa]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474412024-01-26T12:56:11Z2020-06-03T11:48:47ZWhen does an assault turn into domestic abuse?
Domestic abuse is a special type of assault under Iowa Code Section 708.2A (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/708.2A.pdf). An assault turns into domestic abuse under any of the following circumstances (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/236.2.pdf):
It is between family or household members who reside together, or have resided together in the past year;
It is between separated or divorced spouses, even if they are not residing together; or
It is between parents of the same minor child, regardless of whether they’ve been married or lived together.
Assault is a tricky enough crime by itself. But when you throw these wrinkles in, it quickly becomes convoluted. The case might turn on the testimony of a single victim, who may not be telling the truth. High emotions are also pretty common. Anger affects a person’s memory, which in turn affects what the victim tells the police. The result is that people sometimes get charged with domestic abuse based upon a pretty flimsy story.
Increased penalties for domestic crimes
The prosecution will enhance (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/708.2A.pdf) domestic abuse charges based upon any convictions within the past twelve years. For instance, a second simple domestic assault conviction automatically counts as a serious misdemeanor. And from the third onward, every conviction is a Class D felony. Even a deferred judgment counts as a previous conviction. This means it’s important to vigorously fight every domestic charge, even if it’s only your first one.
At Stowers & Nelsen (http://www.stowerslaw.com/), we have years of practice dealing with alleged victims. We know from experience that the victim often recants the allegations. This usually leads to dismissed or significantly reduced charges. If the victim admits they were lying, even felony charges can get dismissed.
Don’t try to deal with domestic abuse allegations all by yourself. We will fight for your right to be heard in court! Give Stowers & Nelsen (http://www.stowerslaw.com) a call today at 515-224-7446 (https://stowerslaw.com/contact/)]]>On Behalf of Stowers & Nelsen<![CDATA[Did the police stop you? Here’s what to do.]]>https://www.stowerslaw.com/?p=474402024-01-26T12:48:27Z2020-05-27T11:37:32ZTips for dealing with the police
Imagine this: you’re the designated driver for a group of friends who have been out drinking. They had a few too many, but you didn’t drink anything but water all night. Now, as you’re driving them home, the police stop and pull you over for going 5-over the speed limit. What do you do?
A police stop can be scary, even if you know you’ve done nothing wrong. While we all hope that police officers will be fair and just, they do not always respect citizen rights. It is important to avoid doing anything that could risk your safety or your freedom. Here are some general guidelines for dealing with the police if they stop you:
Stay respectful and calm, and watch what you say.
Remember, what you say “can and will be used against you in court.” and can give the police an excuse to arrest you.
Do not interfere with or obstruct the police.
Do not argue with a police officer.
Do not touch a police officer.
Do not run from a police officer.
It is not a crime to refuse to answer questions, but refusing to answer might make the police suspicious about you. Police may pat down your clothing if they suspect you of concealing a weapon. Be clear that you do not consent to any searches, either of your vehicle or person.
What should you do when a police stop turns into an arrest?
First, ask if you are under arrest. If you are, you have the right to know why. If the police detain or arrest you, you don’t have to answer any questions outside of typical booking questions, such as your name, address, etc. MAKE SURE TO ASK FOR YOUR ATTORNEY ONCE YOU ARE DETAINED OR ARRESTED. Do so in a very clear manner. For example, don’t just ask: “should I have an attorney for this?”, but do say: “I want my attorney now. (https://stowerslaw.com/contact/)” If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do not say anything more than you have to. You can make your case about your side of the story in court.
If you or a loved one has been charged with a crime, call Stowers & Nelsen (http://www.stowerslaw.com) today at (515) 224-7446. Protect your rights! Act now!]]>