IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 13-1145

Filed May 14, 2014

STATE OF IOWA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

ERIC WILLIAM WEEKS,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Nancy S. Tabor 

(plea) and Mark R. Lawson (sentencing), Judges.

Eric Weeks appeals his sentence for solicitation to commit willful injury, a

non-forcible felony. AFFIRMED.

Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Robert P. Ranschau, 

Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Sheryl A. Soich, Assistant Attorney 

General, Michael H. Walton, County Attorney, and Melissa Zaehringer, Assistant 

County Attorney, for appellee.

Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ. Tabor, J., takes no 

part.
2

VOGEL, P.J.

Eric Weeks appeals his sentence for solicitation to commit willful injury, a 

non-forcible felony. Weeks claims the district court’s reasoning was based on

the sentences imposed in his other criminal cases rather than this case, and the 

imposition of the consecutive five-year sentence was strictly punitive. Because 

we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing this 

sentence and requiring it to run consecutively to Weeks’s other terms of 

incarceration, we affirm.

Weeks pled guilty to solicitation to commit willful injury, a non-forcible 

felony, in violation of Iowa Code sections 705.1 and 708.4(2) (2013), as a result 

of his attempt to hire one or more individuals to murder his family so he could 

avoid prosecution for the sexual abuse of his children. On June 28, 2013, the 

district court held a sentencing hearing in which it imposed sentences relating to 

the solicitation count as well as the guilty convictions arising from the trial for 

sexual abuse. The district court sentenced Weeks to a term not to exceed five 

years, to be served consecutively to the counts arising from the other cases. 

Weeks appeals.

We review sentencing decisions for an abuse of discretion. State v. 

Evans, 672 N.W.2d 328, 331 (Iowa 2003). An abuse of discretion is only found 

when the court exercises its discretion on grounds clearly untenable or to an

extent clearly unreasonable. Id. “Sentencing decisions are cloaked with a strong

presumption in their favor. A sentence will not be upset on appellate review 

unless the defendant demonstrates an abuse of trial court discretion or a defect 
3

in the sentencing procedure, such as trial court consideration of impermissible 

factors.” State v. Grandberry, 619 N.W.2d 399, 401 (Iowa 2000).

In sentencing Weeks, the district court stated:

Well, Mr. Weeks, it’s my duty under the law to determine 

what rehabilitative plan is appropriate for you, and also to consider 

the need of the public for protection. I have the benefit of having 

presided over your trial on Counts 1 through 6 in Number 344614. 

I’ve also reviewed the presentence investigation. I’ve considered 

the information therein, together with the statements of the 

prosecutor, your attorney, and your statements here today. 

This case involved your systematic abuse of your daughter 

over a substantial period of time beginning at age 10. The abuse 

was pervasive and it was so commonplace that it became ingrained 

in the fabric of your family. This was not a situation where one 

night in a hotel room got out of hand, as you stated to some of your 

friends at the time of your arrest. You used your influence as a 

father, together with the prospect of financial or other rewards, to 

obtain sexual gratification from your child. The Court considers the 

length of time over which the abuse occurred, and the 

circumstances surrounding the abuse, as a substantial factor in 

fashioning an appropriate sentence. 

The Court also considers the fact that your abuse involved 

more than one minor victim. You became involved in a sexual 

relationship with another minor daughter from whom your parental 

rights were apparently terminated, and you cultivated a sexual 

relationship with her within weeks of making contact with her. You 

also solicited an unrelated child to engage in sex acts. This 

demonstrates to the Court that you pose a risk to minors outside of 

members of your immediate family. The Court believes you are a 

dangerous sexual predator who preys upon minors, particularly 

minors over whom you have influence. Therefore, community 

protection, and particularly the protection of minors you would come 

into contact with, is also a significant factor in the Court’s 

sentencing decision. 

The Court also considers the attempt you made to solicit 

harm to your family in an effort to impede this criminal prosecution. 

Other reasons for the Court’s sentence include your age, 

your criminal history, which the Court does note was prior to 2003, 

so it’s some time ago, your need for substantial and prolonged 

treatment for your sexual addiction, the harm you have caused to 

your wife and your child, and the recommendation of the PSI that 

includes the other victims in your case. 

The sentence on the two Class B felonies is mandatory. The 

Court believes that you must be incarcerated for a sufficient period 
4

of time until you no longer pose a threat to minors in the 

community. 

. . . .

In FECR 351624, pursuant to your plea of guilty under Count 

4 of the Trial Information to the offense of Solicitation to Commit a 

Non-forcible Felony in violation of Iowa Code Section 705.1, and as 

provided by Sections 902.3 and 902.9 of the Iowa Criminal Code, it 

is the judgment and sentence of the Court that you be, and are 

hereby, committed to the custody of the director of the Iowa 

Department of Corrections for a period not to exceed five years, 

and that you pay a fine of $750. You will receive credit on your 

sentence for time spent in the Scott County Jail. The fine is 

suspended. 

The sentences under Count 1 and 2 in FECR 344614 are to 

be served concurrently. The sentence—sentences under Counts 3 

and 4 in Case Number 344614 are to be served concurrently with 

each other, but consecutive to Counts 1, 2, 5 and 6. The 

sentences in Counts 5 and 6 in FECR 344614 are to be served 

concurrently with each other, but consecutive to the sentences in 

Counts 1 and 2, to be served together, and 3 and 4, to be served 

together. The sentence in FECR 351624 shall be served 

consecutively to all sentences in Case Number 344614.

The Court’s reasons for imposing consecutive sentences, in 

addition to the reasons cited previously, is the longstanding and 

persistent nature of the sexual abuse, and the fact that there were 

multiple minor victims of your abuse. 

The Court orders the sentence for the Solicitation offense to 

be served consecutively, as this not only represented an attempt to 

threaten and intimidate your family, but also to strike a blow at the 

legal system by attempting to prevent the Court from having access 

to their testimony. 

. . . .

The Court orders the Solicitation offense to be served 

consecutively for the reasons stated above. The Court also 

considers the need to protect the community from further offenses 

by this defendant. The Court orders that the consecutive 

sentencing on Counts 1 and 2, 3 and 4, and 5 and 6 most 

appropriately reflect your conduct towards this young victim and the 

number of years and the number of events which occurred during 

that period of time.

(Emphasis added.)

The district court adequately explained its reasoning when ordering the 

sentence for the solicitation to commit willful injury count to run consecutively to 
5

the terms of imprisonment imposed in the other cases. Furthermore, it is not, as 

Weeks characterizes the sentence, a purely punitive measure, considering the 

court’s understandable desire to protect the community and his family from 

Weeks. Consequently, we find no abuse of discretion, and affirm pursuant to 

Iowa Rule of Court 21.26(1)(a), (d), and (e).

AFFIRMED.