Opinion ID: 1608920
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Waiver of Right to Counsel in First OWI Prosecution: Undisputed Facts.

Text: In 1996, Tovar, a college student in Ames, was brought before the Story County district court to plead to a charge of OWI, first offense. At the time, the district court was receiving guilty pleas from several defendants collectively. The judge engaged the defendant in the following discussion. References to the defendant's right to counsel are emphasized. The Court: We are on the record in the State of Iowa versus Felipe Tovar, Case No. 23989. This is the time and place set for arraignment on a trial information charging the defendant with operating while intoxicated. Mr. Tovar appears without counsel and I see, Mr. Tovar, that you waived application for a court appointed attorney. Did you want to represent yourself at today's hearing? Tovar: Yes, sir. .... The Court: And did you want me to read that information to you or did you want to waive the reading? Tovar: Waive the reading. The Court: And how do you wish to plead? Tovar: Guilty. .... The Court: All right. Gentlemen, if you continue with this desire to plead guilty, there are certain rights that each one of you will be giving up and I now will explain those rights to you. First of all, if you enter a plea of not guilty, you would be entitled to a speedy and a public trial by jury. But, if you plead guilty, you give up your right to have a trial of any kind on your charge. Do you understand that, Mr. [Tovar]? Tovar: Yes, sir. .... The Court: If you would enter a plea of not guilty, not only would you have a right to a trial, you would have a right to be represented by an attorney at that trial, including a court appointed attorney. That attorney could help you select a jury, question and cross-examine the State's witnesses, present evidence, if any, in your behalf, and make arguments to the judge and jury on your behalf. But, if you plead guilty, not only do you give up your right to a trial, you give up your right to be represented by an attorney at that trial. Do you understand that, Mr. [Tovar]? Tovar: Yes, sir. [The court then continued to review the other trial-related rights the defendants would be giving up by pleading guilty.] The Court: Gentlemen, those are the rights that you will be giving up if you plead guilty. Knowing that, did you still want to plead guilty? Mr. [Tovar]? Tovar: Yes, sir. (Emphasis added.) After this colloquy, the judge determined whether there was a factual basis for Tovar's guilty plea. He explained to the defendant that there were two elements to his offense: (1) operating a motor vehicle (2) while he was intoxicated. The court then informed the defendant that intoxication could be shown by an alcohol level of .10 or above or by evidence that the consumption of alcohol has affected your judgment or your reasoning or your faculties or it has caused you to lose control in any manner. Tovar admitted driving a car and, although he did not contest his blood alcohol test results of .194, he denied feeling any effects of the alcohol. The judge concluded there was a factual basis for Tovar's guilty plea and then accepted the plea. At a later sentencing hearing, Tovar again appeared pro se. The only discussion of Tovar's right to counsel was the following exchange: The Court: Mr. Tovar, I note that you are appearing here today without having an attorney present and you waived application for a court-appointed attorney. I am sorry. You applied, but it was denied due to the fact you are dependent upon your parents. Mr. Tovar, did you want to represent yourself at today's hearing or did you want to take some time to hire an attorney to represent you? Tovar: No, I will represent myself. The court then conducted essentially the same colloquy used at the guilty plea proceeding and pronounced sentence. Tovar's sentence included a brief stint in the county jail.