Source: http://ia.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180718_0000714.IA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 02:39:52+00:00

Document:
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karen A. Romano, Judge.
Prince Nyomah appeals his convictions of second-degree robbery and assault while participating in a felony, arguing the convictions should have merged.
No person shall be convicted of a public offense which is necessarily included in another public offense of which the person is convicted. If the jury returns a verdict of guilty of more than one offense and such verdict conflicts with this section, the court shall enter judgment of guilty of the greater of the offenses only.
While we generally review a challenge under the merger statute for correction of errors at law, see State v. Ceretti, 871 N.W.2d 88, 92 (Iowa 2015), insofar as an unconstitutional sentence is alleged, our review is de novo, see State v. Zarate, 908 N.W.2d 831, 840 (Iowa 2018).
"[I]n the merger and double jeopardy context, the threshold question is whether it is legally impossible to commit the greater crime without also committing the lesser." State v. Stewart, 858 N.W.2d 17, 21 (Iowa 2015). "If the robbery and assault charges were predicated on a single assault, the two crimes should merge." See State v. Wilson, 523 N.W.2d 440, 441 (Iowa 1994). However, "[i]t is well established in Iowa law that a single course of conduct can give rise to multiple charges and convictions." State v. Velez, 829 N.W.2d 572, 584 (Iowa 2013) (citing State v. McKettrick, 480 N.W.2d 52, 57 (Iowa 1992)). Ultimately, a merger claim turns on whether the two offenses at issue "involve the same offense." State v. Lewis, 514 N.W.2d 63, 69 (Iowa 1994).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.