Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

608 N.W.2d 9

State v. Cooley

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided March 22, 2000

Supreme Court of Iowa · decided 2000-03-22

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 2017

8 state decisions

Relies on State v. Glanton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-03-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

CARTER, Justice

¶1(dissenting).

¶2The case should not turn on an extensive demonstration that Cooley was told he would run a terrible risk if he proceeded without counsel. He had counsel. To be sure, the court was told of Cooley’s intention of putting his attorney in a standby role. But judges should not be required to advise criminal defendants on trial strategy because such a requirement would arm them to manipulate the criminal justice system. See State v. Glanton, 231 N.W.2d 31, 35-36 (Iowa 1975) (judge should not contribute to advocate’s role in trial process). Defendant should not be able to obtain relief because his decision proved to be a mistake.

¶3I would affirm.

¶4McGIVERIN, C.J., and LARSON, J., join this dissent.

/608/nw2d/9 · .json · Public domain