Iowa Supreme Court Affirms OWI Conviction Despite No Affirmative Action from Police

Iowa Supreme Court Affirms OWI Conviction Despite No Affirmative Action from Police

In State v. Clark, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Hope Clark for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI), rejecting her claim that she was denied her statutory right to consult with an attorney under Iowa Code section 804.20. The case highlights a significant division within the Court over what constitutes a “reasonable opportunity” to contact counsel during the OWI process.

Clark was arrested after deputies observed erratic driving and indicators of intoxication. At the jail, she repeatedly asked to speak with an attorney. Her phone was brought to her, and officers told her she could make calls. However, Clark—who suffers from a significant hearing loss—did not use the phone, and officers proceeded with implied consent procedures, ultimately treating her silence and continued requests for a lawyer as a refusal to provide a breath sample.

The majority, led by Chief Justice Christensen, held that Clark received a reasonable opportunity to contact counsel. The Court emphasized that Clark had her phone in front of her, was told she could make calls, and was not physically restrained. The majority concluded that the officers’ conduct satisfied section 804.20’s requirements, especially given the short delay (about eleven minutes) between detention and access to her phone.

Justice Oxley authored a compelling dissent, joined by Justices Waterman and McDermott, arguing the majority oversimplified the facts.  Clark was never affirmatively invited to make a call, her phone was at times covered by paperwork, and officers continued speaking and giving instructions without pause. Moreover, the dissent highlighted Clark’s hearing impairment and the lack of accommodations as factors undermining the reasonableness of the opportunity.

The dissent draws heavily on State v. Hicks, which requires law enforcement to take “affirmative action” to ensure an arrestee’s request to contact an attorney is honored. According to the dissent, merely placing a phone in front of a suspect without explicitly inviting or enabling its use reduces section 804.20 to an illusory right.

This case underscores the importance of how courts interpret “reasonable opportunity” under Iowa Code section 804.20. The majority suggests that access to a phone and verbal acknowledgment may suffice—even absent clear officer facilitation. Defense attorneys should remain vigilant in highlighting practical barriers (like disabilities, officer control of the environment, or continued questioning) that can nullify the apparent availability of legal counsel.

That’s why if you are charged with OWI or Operating While Intoxicated, you need an experience criminal defense lawyer like Lucas Taylor to represent you.