Iowa Court Of Appeals Denies Spahr Bid For Second Trial

Bruce Spahr took the stand in his own defense. (file photo)

Bruce Spahr’s bid for a second trial has been denied by the Iowa Court of Appeals. In their unanimous ruling, the court upheld Spahr’s 2013 conviction of 2nd degree sexual abuse.

Spahr’s appeal focused primarily on testimony the defense had wished to offer, which related to previous abuse on Spahr’s accusers. The testimony the defense wished to offer would have established that the mother of Spahr’s two accusers had removed them from a previous situation when she became concerned the accusers had been abused by their biological father. According to Court’s ruling, the testimony Spahr’s trial attorneys wished to offer would have established that the mother of the accusers would have removed them from the situation had she believed the accusations against Spahr were true. Judge Joel Yates ultimately disallowed this testimony at trial.

Spahr’s appeal also brought up an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, saying that his counsel erred in not objecting to testimony given by Mahaska County Deputy Sheriff Don DeKock, which commented on the credibility of the accusers, and their mother.

In their ruling, the Court of appeals rejected Spahr’s arguments on the disallowed testimony, saying Judge Joel Yates did not abuse discretion when considering arguments on the testimony. “The trial court’s ruling cannot be said to be clearly untenable or unreasonable given the contents of the offer of proof and the applicable rules of evidence,” the court said in their ruling.

On the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the court preserved Spahr’s claim for possible post conviction relief proceedings. In preserving the claim, the court noted that the testimony offered by DeKock was similar to testimony ruled inadmissible in a recent Iowa Supreme Court ruling. The court noted that trial counsel did not object to the testimony “but whether trial counsel had a reason for not doing so cannot be determined”. The court did state that Spahr’s trial counsel should be given the opportunity to respond to the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, noting the record is inadequate to address Spahr’s claim.

Next, Spahr’s attorneys could file a request for further review with the Iowa Supreme Court, however the high court grants few requests for further review.