Iowa Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Despite Hearsay and Procedural Concerns in Theft Case
Iowa Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Despite Hearsay and Procedural Concerns in Theft Case
In State v. Jason Michael Pirie, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed a third-degree theft conviction and two-year prison sentence, despite acknowledging that some testimony admitted at trial qualified as improper hearsay. The Court ultimately concluded the error was harmless in light of overwhelming video evidence and other corroborating testimony.
Pirie was convicted after security footage showed him placing a bottle of Patrón tequila under his shirt and leaving a Hy-Vee store without paying. On appeal, he raised several issues, including:
-
Judicial Recusal: Pirie claimed the trial judge should have recused himself due to prior representation of Pirie in unrelated cases. The Court found no evidence of bias or prejudice arising from that relationship.
-
Hearsay Evidence: A police officer testified that Pirie’s two friends gave consistent accounts about visiting Hy-Vee—accounts that conflicted with Pirie’s denial. Although the Court agreed this was indirect hearsay and improperly admitted, it found the error harmless because it was cumulative and the video evidence of the theft was clear and compelling.
-
New Trial Request: Pirie moved for a new trial based on the post-verdict availability of a witness. The Court found the issue was waived because Pirie failed to raise it before trial or request a continuance.
-
Remote Sentencing Challenge: Sentencing occurred remotely due to the judge’s COVID-19 diagnosis. Pirie did not object at the time, and the Court ruled he failed to preserve the issue. The Court also noted that Pirie participated meaningfully in the proceeding.
-
Sentencing Discretion: The Court rejected Pirie’s argument that a two-year consecutive prison sentence for a $55 theft was excessive, pointing to his extensive criminal record and the fact that the theft occurred while he was on probation.