District 2B Public Documents

Boal, Michael [IGOV]
From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 11:20 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Davis, Nick [IGOV]
Subject: District 2B applications
Scott,
Do you have copies of applications and a list of applicants for next Tuesday’s interviews? Thanks,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
1
From: [email protected]
To: Boal, Michael [IGOV]
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications
Attachments: D2B Judicial Applicant Interview Schedule (Oct 2021).pdf
Hi Michael,

Attached is a copy of the interview schedule.

This should get posted yet today with links to the application materials.

If that is not soon enough I can forward to you the application materials.

Scott

From: "Boal, Michael [IGOV]" <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Davis, Nick [IGOV]" <[email protected]>
Date: 10/08/2021 11:19 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications

Scott,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
1
2B District Court Judge Applicant Interview Schedule
Tuesday, October 12, 2021
* In Boone, Large Courtroom *
Commission meeting 9:00 a.m.
Joseph McCarville 9:30 a.m.

Jonathan Beaty 9:50 a.m.
Jerry Schnurr 10:10 a.m.
Joseph Tofilon 10:30 a.m.
break 10:50 a.m.
Derek Johnson 11:10 a.m.
Jonathan Holscher 11:30 a.m.
Arch Wilson 11:50 a.m.
Ben Meyer 12:10 p.m.

No problem‐ if you think about it, just shoot me a note when they’re posted. Thanks!
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 11:46:27 AM
To: Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]>

Hi Michael,




Scott

Cc: "Davis, Nick [IGOV]" <[email protected]>
Date: 10/08/2021 11:19 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications

Scott,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
1
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 12:47 PM
Will do.

Date: 10/08/2021 11:54 AM

Michael

Sent from my iPhone


Hi Michael,
Scott

Cc:
"Davis, Nick [IGOV]" <[email protected]>
Date: 10/08/2021 11:19 AM
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] District 2B applications

1

Scott,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone

2
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications - have been posted, link
Hi Michael,

It's all posted:

https://www.iowajnc.gov/district-commissions/judicial-district-2

Date: 10/08/2021 11:54 AM

Michael

Sent from my iPhone


Hi Michael,
Scott

1
Cc:
Date: 10/08/2021 11:19 AM
Subject:

Scott,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone

2

Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 2:04 PM
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications - have been posted, link
Thanks, Scott. Not urgent- but the link for Arch Wilson directs to Derek Johnson’s application.
Could you forward along the application of Arch Wilson when youre able? Thanks,
Michael
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications ‐ have been posted, link

Hi Michael,

It's all posted:


Date: 10/08/2021 11:54 AM

Michael

Sent from my iPhone


Hi Michael,
1
Scott

From:
"Boal, Michael [IGOV]" <[email protected]>
Cc:
Date:
10/08/2021 11:19 AM
Subject:

Scott,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
2
Attachments: Wilson Judicial Application.pdf; Wilson Writing Sample 1.pdf; Wilson Writing Sample 2.pdf; Wilson
Writing Sample 3.pdf
Sorry about that, I've asked State Court to fix it.

Here are the application materials from Mr. Wilson:

Date: 10/12/2021 02:04 PM

Thanks, Scott. Not urgent- but the link for Arch Wilson directs to Derek Johnson’s application.
Could you forward along the application of Arch Wilson when youre able? Thanks,
Michael

Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] District 2B applications ‐ have been posted, link

Hi Michael,
It's all posted:


Date: 10/08/2021 11:54 AM

1

Michael

Sent from my iPhone


Hi Michael,
Scott

From:
"Boal, Michael [IGOV]" <[email protected]>
Cc:
Date:
10/08/2021 11:19 AM
Subject:

Scott,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone

2
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR SEBRING COUNTY
STATE OF IOWA, Case FECR123456
Plaintiff,
vs.
LISA SMITH
Defendant.
MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

Ms. Smith, hereinafter referred to as “the Defendant”, in the above matter moves for the
suppression and exclusion of all physical and testimonial evidence obtained or derived from or
through or as a result of the unlawful search, seizure, interrogation arrest and detention of the
Defendant, pursuant to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1,
Section 8 of the Iowa Constitution.
Specifically, the Defendant moves for the suppression and exclusion of a bag containing
8 grams of methamphetamine, $6,146.00 in U.S. currency, a small baggie of ½ gram of
marijuana, a vape pen with THC, a digital scale with white residue, the phone seized from the
Defendant and any statements taken from the Defendant.
INTRODUCTION
The Defendant files this Motion to Suppress Evidence gathered by the Sebring Police
Department, using tactics that are prohibited by the 4th Amendment to the United States
Constitution and Article 1, Section 8 of the Iowa Constitution. The Sebring Police Department
unlawfully seized the Defendant without probable cause or reasonable suspicion that a crime had
been committed.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On November 15, 2021, the Sebring Police Department conducted a traffic stop on a red
Hyundai vehicle, that was parked at the Quick Trip gas station, located at 567 Ocean Drive, in
Sebring, Iowa. The Officers pull up behind the suspect vehicle and physically blocked the car
from being moved by placing 2 large, marked Police Department SUVs behind the suspect
1
vehicle. The Defendant was sitting in the driver’s seat. The Officers told the Defendant that they
had received a tip from a former reserve officer that they observed someone approach a red
vehicle and reach inside the car, handing something to one of the occupants. The tipster then
allegedly followed the vehicle and reported that it was stopped at the Quick Trip gas station in
Sebring, Iowa.
Officers Thomas, Martin and Baker, respond to the scene and approach the vehicle. The
Officers inform the Defendant that they are stopping the Defendant for suspected drug use.
Officers Thomas and Martin continue to explain that a former reserve officer thought they
observed a hand-to-hand drug transaction being conducted outside the residence located at 723
Edgewood Avenue, in Sebring, IA. The Defendant explains to the Officers that she was just
picked up by the owner of the vehicle, Mark Anderson, and that her friend came out of the
residence at 723 Edgewood Avenue to give her phone to the Defendant, which she forgot at the
residence, when she exited, moments prior. The Defendant shows her phone to Officer Thomas,
which is a large, black object.
Officer Martin returns to his vehicle and runs a license check on the Defendant and
confirms that the Defendant’s license to drive is suspended. Officer Baker is on the passenger
side of the vehicle. Officer Thomas askes the Defendant for consent to search the vehicle, the
Defendant indicates the vehicle belongs to Mark Anderson. Mr. Anderson gives Officer Thomas
consent to search the vehicle.
The Defendant is sitting in the driver’s seat, and Officer Thomas indicates that he is also
requesting consent to search the Defendant’s purse as well. The Defendant refuses consent to
search her purse. Officer Thomas askes the Defendant for her identification and Officer Martin
asks the Defendant if she was driving. The Defendant denies being the driver of the vehicle and
explains that she switched seats to utilize the mirror in the driver’s side sunscreen, in order to
apply makeup.
The Defendant gets out of her seat in order to allow the Officers to conduct their search
and there is a marijuana pipe underneath the Defendant, in the driver’s seat. The Defendant is
taken into custody. The Officers conduct a search of the vehicle and they locate $6,146.00 in
cash, 8 grams of suspected methamphetamine, a digital scale and a vape pen.
2
ARGUMENT
The Fourth Amendment to The United States Constitution protects persons from
unreasonable searches and seizures and requires a search warrant to be supported by probable
cause. U.S. Const. amend. IV. The Iowa Constitution similarly protects persons from
unreasonable searches and seizures. Iowa Cons. Art. I, § 8. See also, State v. Baker, 925 N.W.2d
602 (Iowa 2019). Warrantless searches and seizures are per se unreasonable unless they fall
under one of the recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement. State v. Canas, 597 N.W.2d
488, 492 (Iowa 1999), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Turner, N.W.2d 601 (Iowa 2001).
One recognized exception allows an officer to stop an individual or vehicle for
investigatory purposes for a brief detention based only on reasonable suspicion that a criminal
act is occurring. State v. Kinkead, 570 N.W.2d 97, 100 (Iowa 1997) (citing Terry v. Ohio,392
U.S. 1, 21-22, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880, 20 L.ed.2d 889 (1968)) see also Baker at 610. “The purpose
of an investigatory stop is to allow a police officer to confirm or dispel suspicions of criminal
activity through reasonable questioning” State v. Kreps 650 N.W.2d 636, 641 (Iowa 2002). This
stop is a brief detention, and therefore “[a]n officer may make an investigatory stop with
‘considerably less than proof of wrongdoing by a preponderance of the evidence.’ Id. at 642
(quoting State v. Richardson, 501 N.W.2d 495, 496-97 (Iowa 1993) (per curiam)).
Such a stop and detention, is still a “seizure” within the meaning of the Fourth
Amendment and article I, section 8. State v. Heminover, 619 N.W.2d 353, 357 (Iowa 2000) (en
banc), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Turner, N.W.2d 601 (Iowa 2001). To justify an
investigatory stop, an officer must have reasonable suspicion, backed by specific and articulable
facts, to believe criminal activity is afoot. Terry, 392 U.S. at 21, 88 S.Ct. at 1880.
“Circumstances raising mere suspicion or curiosity are not enough” Heminover, 619 N.W.2d at
357-58.
In the instant case, Officers Thomas, Martin and Baker had only been told that a former
reserve officer observed what they thought might be a drug deal because the tipster observed a
person walk up to the suspect vehicle and pass an item through the window. This is simply not
enough to give officers articulable facts to believe criminal activity is afoot. An analysis of the
facts in State v. Baker, 925 N.W.2d 602 (Iowa 2019), is instructive.
3
In Baker, officers initiated a traffic stop on a suspect vehicle after an officer observes
what he believed to be a hand-to hand drug transaction on an individual the officer was actively
tracking at the time.
In Baker, the officer had been a ten-year veteran of the Drug Enforcement Task Force,
and the officer was aware of other facts that supported the conclusion that the officer had just
observed criminal activity. The officer had observed his target acting suspiciously near a known
drug house that was under surveillance two weeks prior, there had been an anonymous tip that
the target in Baker had just returned to town with a large shipment of marijuana and that there
was a large amount of marijuana at Baker’s house. In Baker, the officers conducted surveillance
at the home of Baker and the officers observed a hand-to hand drug transaction take place.
In the instant case, all the State has provided is a former reserve officer stating that they
think they observed a hand-to-hand drug transaction, when the former reserve officer only
observed the Defendant’s boyfriend hand her phone through the window.
Accordingly, this Court should suppress any and all evidence that resulted from the
improper and illegal traffic stop that was conducted on the Defendant on November 6, 2020.
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF
For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant respectfully requests that this Court suppress all
evidence obtained during or as a result of the unlawful search and seizure. In the alternative, this
Court should order an evidentiary hearing to determine whether to grant this Motion to Suppress.
Respectfully Submitted,
Arch Wilson Law, LLC
By:/s/ A. Joseph Wilson III
Arach J Wilson III, Attorney at Law (AT0013173)
P.O. Box 2408
Ames, IA 50010
Telephone: 515-708-7587
Facsimile: 515-608-4487
[email protected]
Attorney for Defendant
4
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR HARDEE COUNTY
Plaintiff, MOTION IN LIMINE
vs.
JOHN JOHNSON
Defendant.
COMES NOW, the Defendant, John Johnson, requesting this Court to enter an Order in Limine
to prevent any discussion in opening statement, questioning witnesses or in argument, or the
admission of any evidence concerning any of the following matters:
1. Any evidence or reference to any previous actions against the Defendant involving the
Department of Human Services. Any discussion of these matters would be irrelevant in
this case and any relevance would be outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice,
confusing the issues and would be misleading to the Jury. Iowa R. Evid. 403 see also
McClure v. Walgreen Co., 613 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 2000); Rhiner v. City of Clive, 373
N.W.2d466 (Iowa 1985).
2. The admission of any web browser history of the Defendant including any references to
any pornographic web sites visited by the Defendant on his phone. The Defendant in this
case is not charged with possession of child pornography and there is no allegation in the
alleged offenses in the instant case that the Defendant incorporated pornography in any
of the alleged abuse. Any such evidence would be irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial to the
Defendant and misleading to the Jury. Admission of any of the aforementioned evidence
would also constitute inadmissible evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts to
demonstrate a disposition or propensity to commit additional crimes or wrongful acts.
Iowa R. Evid. 403 see also McClure v. Walgreen Co., 613 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 2000);
Rhiner v. City of Clive, 373 N.W.2d466 (Iowa 1985) see also Iowa R. Evid. 5.404(b)(1),
State v. Richards 879 N.W.2d 140 (Iowa 2016).
3. Any testimony, or reference to the facts and circumstances pertaining to Hardee County
Case number FECR123897. Admission of any of the aforementioned evidence
would also constitute inadmissible evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts to
demonstrate a disposition or propensity to commit additional crimes or wrongful acts.
Iowa R. Evid. 403 see also McClure v. Walgreen Co., 613 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 2000);
Rhiner v. City of Clive, 373 N.W.2d466 (Iowa 1985) see also Iowa R. Evid. 5.404(b)(1),
State v. Richards 879 N.W.2d 140 (Iowa 2016).
4. The admission of photographs taken pursuant to the execution of the search warrant at
Johnson Auto in this case. Specifically, the Defendant objects to 11 photographs that
depict images that are irrelevant and pose a significant risk of unfair prejudice to the
Defendant and are misleading to the Jury. There are several photographs of the common
areas that the Defendant does not object to. The Defendant does object to the admission
of images depicting adult pornographic DVD’s, an image depicting a bb gun lying on the
ground, images of pink handcuffs, an image of an adult pornographic magazine, and
images of a search warrant from an unrelated investigation with the Defendant’s name on
them. Admission of any of the aforementioned evidence would also constitute
inadmissible evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts to demonstrate a disposition or
propensity to commit additional crimes or wrongful acts. Iowa R. Evid. 403 see also
McClure v. Walgreen Co., 613 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 2000); Rhiner v. City of Clive, 373
N.W.2d466 (Iowa 1985) see also Iowa R. Evid. 5.404(b)(1), State v. Richards 879
N.W.2d 140 (Iowa 2016).
WHEREFORE, The Defendant respectfully requests this Court enter an Order granting this
Motion in Limine.

Hub Tower 699 Walnut St. Ste. 415
Des Moines, Iowa 50309-3962
Telephone: 515-724-5967
Facsimile: 515-608-4487
[email protected]
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR PASCO COUNTY
Plaintiff,
vs.
JIM JONES
Defendant.
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO CORRECT ILLEGAL SENTENCE
Mr. Johnson, hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”, is respectfully requesting this
Court grant his previous Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence in cases FECR123456 &
FECR678912 because the sentencing enhancements in the aforementioned cases were based on
an illegal sentence in case AGCR487562. The sentence in AGCR487562, which is the basis for
the habitual offender enhancements in FECR123456 & FECR678912, were illegal at the time of
use for sentencing purposes because the sentence in AGCR487562 was in violation of the
Double Jeopardy Clause of The United States Constitution.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The Defendant entered into a plea agreement in case AGCR487562, on May 2, 2001. The
Defendant plead to Willful Injury, a Class D Felony. The Defendant was sentenced to 5 years in
prison, which was suspended. The Defendant was placed on probation on May 2, 2001. The
Defendant was discharged from probation on May 2, 2005. The Defendant filed a Motion to
Correct an Illegal Sentence in case AGCR487562 on November 9, 2011. The Court resolved the
1
Defendant’s Motion through a Nunc Pro Tunc Order, which the Defendant successfully
appealed.
The Iowa Court of Appeals ordered the Defendant’s sentencing in AGCR487562 vacated
and remanded to the District Court for resentencing in 2013. The Defendant was resentenced in
AGCR487562 on January 17, 2014. The Defendant received a 5-year prison sentence that was
suspended. The Defendant was placed on probation in May of 2014, for a second time in
AGCR487562. The Defendant was discharged from the second term of probation in
AGCR487562 on January 12, 2016. During the Defendant’s second probation sentence in
AGCR487562, he was not given credit for the time he served on probation from May of 2001
through May of 2005 towards his probation from January 17, 2004 through January 12, 2016.
ARGUMENT
The Double Jeopardy Clause of The United States Constitution protects defendants against
multiple punishments for the same offense. Probation is a form of punishment within the purview
of the Double Jeopardy Clause. One day of probation is equal to one day of incarceration for the
calculation of credit for time previously served on probation against a new sentence in the same
case.
The Double Jeopardy Clause of The United States Constitution restrains prosecutors from
continuously trying defendants until the right theory or jury produces a conviction, as well as
restraining the judiciary from exceeding the bounds of its authority and imposing greater
punishments than intended by the legislature. Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S.794 798, 109 S.Ct.
2201, 2204, 104 L.Ed.2d 856 (1989), see also State v. Jepsen, 907 N.W.2d 495 (2018).
The United States Supreme Court has recognized that the Double Jeopardy Clause
prohibits courts from imposing a second punishment “in the same court, in the same facts, for the
same statutory offense” Ex Parte Lange, 85 U.S. (18Wall.) 163, 168, 21 L. Ed 872 (1873).
2
Probation is a form of punishment that is within the purview of the protections of the Double
Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution. Korematsu v. United States, 319 U.S. 432,
435, 63 S.Ct. 1124, 1126, 87L.Ed 1497 (1943) (quoting Cooper v. United States, 91 F.2d 195,
199 (5th Cir. 1937), see also, State v. Lathrop, 781 N.W.2d 288, 298 (Iowa 2010), United States
v. McMillen, 917 F.2d 773, 774, 776 (3d Cir. 1990). If a defendant’s initial conviction is
overturned because the defendant was deprived of constitutionally required procedure, or if a
defendant’s conviction is overturned because of illegality, it remains an “unmitigated fiction” to
find that the punishment has been “wiped clean.” Jepsen at 500. (quoting North Carolina v.
Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 717, 89 S. Ct. 2072, 2076, 23 L. Ed.2d 656(1969) (footnotes omitted)
overruled on other grounds. When a defendant’s original sentence is voided for illegality and the
defendant is resentenced, without being convicted; the defendant is to be given full credit for the
time served on probation. Id at 499. The credit that the defendant is to be given for the time
served on probation is equal to the time spent in prison, day for day and there is no “offset” for
probation under the guise that probation is not equal to prison. Id. One day on probation is equal
to one day in prison for the purposes of credit for time previously served. Id.
In the instant case, the Defendant was placed on probation in case AGCR487562 on May
2, 2001. The Defendant served his probationary punishment in full, and he was successfully
discharged from probation in May of 2005. The Defendant exercised his constitutional right to
due process by petitioning the Court to correct an illegality in his original sentence in
AGCR487562, in November of 2011, after the Defendant had served his sentence in
AGCR487562, in full.
This Court resentenced the Defendant in AGCR487562 on January 17, 2014, imposing a
5-year suspended sentence, with probation under the supervision of the Iowa Department of
3
Corrections. The Defendant served over 2 years on the second term of probation without being
given credit for the time he previously served. This second sentence that the Defendant served in
AGCR487563 was in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Unites States Constitution.
Jepsen v. State, 907 N.W.2d 495 (2018).
CONCLUSION
This Court should vacate the sentences in cases FECR123456, FECR678912 &
AGCR487563. The Defendant should be resentenced in cases FECR123456 & FECR678912
without the habitual offender enhancement and the Defendant’s sentence in case SGCR487563
should be vacated and the Defendant should be able to withdraw his Plea of Guilty in case
AGCR487563 because the plea in case AGCR487563 was a Rule 9 plea that bound the Court to
an illegal sentence, because the Court waived mandatory fines.

P.O. Box 2408
Ames, IA 50010
Telephone: 515-708-7587
Facsimile: 515-608-4487
[email protected]
4
To: Boal, Michael [IGOV]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: 2B District Judicial Nomination Commission
Attachments: 2B - Judicial Nominating Commission selection (Oct 2021) .pdf
Dear Mr. Boal, Chief Justice Christensen and Ms. Kottmeyer,

Today the 2B District Nomination Commission met and submits the two names attached to fill the district court judgeship
vacated by the appointment of the Honorable Gina Badding to the Court of Appeals.

Scott

1
From: <
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 5:42 PM
To: ; ; Boal, Michael [IGOV]
Subject: Fwd: thank you
I have been struggling today after our meeting yesterday. The attached email really bothered me as well! I did not reply
to because I really didn’t know what to say to him. I’m thinking, did he really say he wanted to pull his application
or was this another push from Judge Sobe. I don’t think we should let this drop. I appreciate you doing what you
did. I know you feel the same about the Judges actions. I’m not sure if I should call and ask him if he told
the Judge and Court Reporter what we were told. I talked with last night and was pretty upset as well with
the Judges actions. It might be good if the three or four of us could talk. I can meet or do a zoom call or what ever
think. Let me know!
Sincerely

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:
From: < >

Date: October 12, 2021 at 10:42:06 PM CDT
To: <
Subject: thank you

Dear ,

It was very nice to meet you. Even though I'm disappointed that I didn't make the top two, I want to
thank you for considering me and taking the time to meet with me. Do you have any suggestions for
how I can improve for next time?

Thanks,

1

Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2021 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: 2B District Judicial Nomination Commission
Thank you, Scott. Can you forward me Mr. Beaty and Mr. Johnson’s confidential portion of their applications when you
have a chance? Thanks
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:54:43 PM
To: Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected]



Scott

1
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: 2B District Judicial Nomination Commission
Attachments: Beaty Background Information.pdf; Johnson-Background.Information.pdf
Hi Michael,

Here you go:

Date: 10/14/2021 07:30 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 2B District Judicial Nomination Commission

Thank you, Scott. Can you forward me Mr. Beaty and Mr. Johnson’s confidential portion of their applications
when you have a chance? Thanks
Michael

Sent from my iPhone

Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:54:43 PM
To: Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>;
[email protected] <[email protected]>

Scott

1

To:
Subject: Call?
Do you have time on Monday afternoon for a call?

Thanks
Michael
--
Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel
Office of the Governor, State of Iowa
Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg
515.326.1634 | [email protected]

1
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?
Yes, that would be good. Anytime Monday pm before 4:00
Thanks

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 15, 2021, at 3:48 PM, Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:

,
Do you have time on Monday afternoon for a call?
Thanks
Michael

--

1
Subject: Call
Start: Mon 10/18/2021 2:00 PM

End: Mon 10/18/2021 2:30 PM
Recurrence: (none)
Organizer: Boal, Michael [IGOV]
1

Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 11:57 AM
To:
Subject: Call?
Do you have time for a phone call regarding District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission in the
next couple of days? If so, let me know some times you are available and we’ll connect. Thank
you,
Michael
--

1

To:
Subject: Call?
you,
Michael
--

1

To:
Subject: Call?
you,
Michael
--

1
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?
Yes I could visit today most anytime or tomorrow before 4pm. My cell is

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 11:56 AM Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:
,
you,
Michael
--

1

To:
Subject: RE: Call?
Great, could I call around 3pm today? I’ll use my cell, 515.326.1634. Thanks,
Michael
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?


,
you,
Michael
--

1
--

2
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?
Certainly.
I'm pretty open tomorrow. Give me a time in your schedule and I can make it work.
Before we speak tomorrow, I'm going to send you a copy of my notes ‐ so you'll know my concerns.

you,
Michael
--

1
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?
Sounds good, talk to you then.

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 1:38 PM Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:
Great, could I call around 3pm today? I’ll use my cell, 515.326.1634. Thanks,
Michael
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?


Do you have time for a phone call regarding District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission in
the next couple of days? If so, let me know some times you are available and we’ll connect.
Thank you,
Michael
--
1

2
From: <
Subject: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Mr. Boal ‐

Our commission has been very busy.

Most recently our commission met on Tuesday, October 12, 2021, to fill another vacancy in District 2B. I was extremely
disappointed with the day's process due to the actions of Chief Judge Stoebe. In my opinion, he used his position of
authority to influence the decision of the commission. It was blatantly obvious who his choice was and he was willing to
discredit any of the other candidates.
We had eight candidates to interview that morning. All were treated as they should be, with the exception of
. was allowed double the scheduled time and was "coached" by Judge Stoebe throughout.
As we entered into our deliberations, Judge Stoebe took the lead and proceeded to destroy the credibility of each
candidate, with the exception of . He did not speak to the professional qualifications of the candidates, but
attacked their character and shared inappropriate accusations of the candidates' family life, health, and business
dealings. In the case of , Judge Stoebe lied about 's intent to withdraw his application.
Under the direction of Judge Stoebe, the process was extremely flawed, unfair, and unethical. Another commissioner
( ) and I tried to address the obvious intent of Judge Stoebe before we voted, but the damage was already
done.
I know you have been in contact with my fellow commissioner, . and I are in agreement that two of
the top candidates were eliminated from consideration due to the actions of Judge Stoebe.
I look forward to speaking with you. I can provide more detail if necessary.

1

To:
Subject: RE: Call?
Thanks, I did receive your notes. I can make myself available any time between 10 at 1
tomorrow- let me know what works best and I will call. Thanks,
Michael
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?

Certainly.

,
you,
Michael
--

1
From: <
Subject: Re: Call?
If you could try for sometime between 10‐10:30 AM would be great.
Thanks.

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 2:27 PM Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks, . I did receive your notes. I can make myself available any time between 10 at 1
tomorrow- let me know what works best and I will call. Thanks,
Michael
From <
Subject: Re: Call?

Certainly.

,
Do you have time for a phone call regarding District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission in
the next couple of days? If so, let me know some times you are available and we’ll connect.
Thank you,
1
Michael
--

2
From: <
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 10:37 AM
Subject: Fwd: Thank you
Email with ...

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: <
Date: Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 9:21 AM
Subject: Re: Thank you
To: <

I’ll contact today and will let you know how it goes

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 13, 2021, at 11:13 PM, < wrote:
I certainly feel should be included.
I agree that this is a serious concern.
I believe we sent two qualified candidates to the governor. But I don’t feel it was a legitimate process.
, , and were certainly victims of unfair and unethical acquisitions
and misinformation by Judge Stoebe.

I sent another email to Caitlin Jarzen, Director of Governmental Affairs, Iowa Judicial Branch.
I shared what I learned from .. and asked how we can have our concerns addressed in a
timely manner.

I’ll let you know what I hear from her.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 13, 2021, at 9:37 PM, < wrote:
I view this as a very serious situation. I believe we can not let this go. I would like to
share this info with if you both think that’s ok. If ok, I will contact him in the
morning.
Do you think I should respond to ? If so, I would just say I will be in touch. Let me
know what you think.

1
Sent from my iPad

On Oct 13, 2021, at 8:00 PM,
< wrote:
I received the email from as well. I replied to him, and this
was his response.

I would like to meet.. or zoom. Whatever works for the group.

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:
From: < >

Date: October 13, 2021 at 2:41:06 PM CDT
To: <
Subject: Re: Thank you
You're kidding!

No, I never said I didn't want the job.

I joked to his court reporter before my interview asking
if it was too
late to back out because I was so nervous, but I it was
absolutely a
joke.

Judge Stoebe told me I did a good job and I said nothing
to him other
than "thank you."

I worked my tail off to get to the governor. It makes
no sense.

Oh my.

Thanks for the information,

On 10/13/21,
< wrote:

Dear ‐
It was a pleasure to meet you!
I'm a little confused. At the beginning
of the day, you were ranked in the
2
top tier for many of the
commissioners... until Judge Stoebe
shared that
following your interview yesterday, you
asked Judge Stoebe if it was too
late to withdraw your application. After
that information was shared, we
questioned whether you wanted the
appointment..?? Did you say that to
Judge Stoebe? Were you only joking?
It certainly changed the minds of the
commissioners to consider you
seriously.

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 10:40 PM
>
wrote:

Dear ,

It was very nice to meet
you. Even though I'm
disappointed that I
didn't
make the top two, I
want to thank you for
considering me and
taking the
time to meet with
me. Do you have any
suggestions for how I
can improve
for next time?

Thanks,

3

To:
Subject: Phone call
,
Are you available for a phone call regarding the recent meeting of the District 2B Judicial
Nominating Commission? If so, please let me know a few open dates and times and we can nail
down a time. Thank you-
Michael
--
515.326.1634 (cell) | [email protected]

1
From: < >

Subject: Re: Phone call
Dear Sir,

I am open tomorrow (Thursday, October 21st) between 8:00 and 9:30, 10:15‐1:00, 2:30‐3:30, and after 4:00

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 2:16 PM Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:
,
Michael
--

1
From: < >

Sorry, that last email sent prematurely.

I am open tomorrow (Thursday, October 21st) between 8:00 and 9:30, 10:15‐1:00, 2:30‐3:30, and after 4:00.

On Friday, October 22nd, I am open between 8:00 and 9:00, 10:30‐1, and after 3:15.

I can send you my schedule for next week when I get back to my work computer in the morning if you need it.

Thank you,

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 6:47 PM < > wrote:
Dear Sir,


,
Michael
--
1

2

To:
How about tomorrow around 10:30? My cell is 515‐326‐1634. Feel free to call any time around then, and I will certainly
make myself available. Thank you,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
From: >
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 6:50:30 PM





Thank you,

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 6:47 PM < > wrote:
Dear Sir,


,
1
Michael
--

2
From: >
Sounds good, talk to you then.

How about tomorrow around 10:30? My cell is 515‐326‐1634. Feel free to call any time around then, and I will certainly
make myself available. Thank you,
Michael

Sent from my iPhone
From < >

Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 6:50:30 PM





Thank you,

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 6:47 PM > wrote:
Dear Sir,


,
1
Nominating Commission? If so, please let me know a few open dates and times and we can
nail down a time. Thank you-
Michael
--

2

To:
Subject: Notes
,
If you are still willing, could you please send me a copy of your notes from the October 12
commission meeting? I know we briefly discussed during our phone conversation. Of course if
not, no worries. Thank you,
Michael
--

1
From: <
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Notes
Mr. Boal ‐
I sent you a letter via email on Tuesday, October 19, expressing my concerns surrounding the October 12 District 2B
Judicial Nominating Commission.
I have also provided the email "thread" with .

Are you asking for more detail? The notes I based our phone conversation on?
Right now they are "loose notes" that I understand. If you want me to collect them in more detail, I'm happy to do that
and send them to you.

On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 4:25 PM Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:
,
Michael
--

1

To:
Subject: RE: Notes
Thanks, . If you have any written notes from the Commission meeting or anything written
down from before we chatted, I would like to see those. But no need to create anything new at
this point. Thanks,
Michael
From: <
Subject: Re: Notes

Mr. Boal ‐


,
Michael
--

1

2
From: <
Subject: Re: Notes
Ok. I’ll get them cleaned up and sent to you this afternoon.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 25, 2021, at 9:21 AM, Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks, . If you have any written notes from the Commission meeting or
anything written down from before we chatted, I would like to see those. But no
need to create anything new at this point. Thanks,
Michael

From: <
Subject: Re: Notes

Mr. Boal ‐
I sent you a letter via email on Tuesday, October 19, expressing my concerns surrounding the October
12 District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission.

Right now they are "loose notes" that I understand. If you want me to collect them in more detail, I'm
happy to do that and send them to you.

,
If you are still willing, could you please send me a copy of your notes from the
October 12 commission meeting? I know we briefly discussed during our phone
conversation. Of course if not, no worries. Thank you,
Michael

1
--

2
From: <
Subject: Re: Notes
Attachments: Judicial Commission Notes 10.12.21.docx
I have attached the notes I spoke to via our phone conversation.

I still feel strongly that two of the top candidates were eliminated from consideration due to the actions of Judge Stoebe
‐ and
Judge Stoebe knew who the strongest competition was for and he literally picked them off one by one until
was the only top candidate left standing.

What should be a legitimate and reputable process, was instead unethical, unprofessional and just wrong.

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 9:21 AM Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks, . If you have any written notes from the Commission meeting or anything written
down from before we chatted, I would like to see those. But no need to create anything new at
this point. Thanks,
Michael
From: <
Subject: Re: Notes

Mr. Boal ‐

1

,
Michael
--

2
NOTES
Notes of following the District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission held Tuesday,

October 12, 2021
was allowed at least double the time in the chair (40 minutes). Was “coached” by Judge
Stoebe -- tell them this… tell them about this case… tell them how you handled this…
Only “negative” shared by Judge Stoebe regarding “ has trouble projecting his ability”
At one point Judge Stoebe said as he ran into people who wrote letters of recommendation for other
applicants, that many said to him “but I really support ”
Following the interviews: (loosely quoted)
Judge Stoebe took the lead and said let me tell you about . There are two
and the one you saw today was the political, polished . Not the real .
According to Judge
Stoebe, was ruthless and heartless. Judge
Stoebe said didn’t have the heart to be on the bench.
At this point, my fellow commissioner, , spoke up saying he didn’t really feel this story
ad any bearing on the discussion of the day. I remember saying – you know I’ve
been in business long enough to know there’s always two sides to every story.
Other comments from Judge Stoebe regarding : he yells at people, people think ’s
assistant is a saint for putting up with him .. He said has a poor reputation among the court
reporters..
It gave him ( a license to screw up
he is a schmoozer – knows how to work a cocktail

hour…
Next Judge Stoebe said let’s talk about ’s… This is what he told us about
– describe him as “clueless ” .. said it was his nickname.
– travel will be too much for him. He uses GoToMeeting too often. Told us that
asked about withdrawing his application.
– is scared he’ll get assigned another county. He has health issues.


Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 4:25 PM
Subject: District 2B JNC
Molly,
Thank you for the call this afternoon. I understand that the Court and the Chief Justice will not
take further action regarding this judicial appointment. But I’ve been asked to request more
information regarding the findings of Judge Drew’s investigation. And I believe this information
will be helpful in closing our investigation.
As you will recall, I began an investigation into the Commission meeting once concerns about
this process and Judge Stoebe’s involvement were raised with our office. I initiated the
investigation by speaking with four commissioners and one applicant for the judge position.
However, that applicant raised a concern that he may be retaliated against
Out of respect for the judicial
branch, at that point our office felt it was more appropriate for the Court or the judicial branch to
speak with Judge Stoebe and get a statement from him regarding the substance of the
complaints.
I understand that Judge Drew relayed to the Court that Judge Stoebe agreed he will no longer
chair the commission for future vacancies. And I understand that Judge Drew did not provide
any notes or documents to the Court regarding his investigation. But in order for the Governor to
make an informed decision on whether and how she should move forward with this process, can
you tell me the findings of Judge Drew’s investigation, specifically what Judge Stoebe said about
the incident? This information will allow our office to complete the investigation and compare
Judge Stoebe’s statement with the statements and recollections of other witnesses that I spoke
with.
Thank you,
Michael
--
1
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2021 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] District 2B JNC
Chief Judge Drew was in Des Moines this morning for Judicial Council. I had the
opportunity to discuss your email from yesterday afternoon with him.

As I shared with you previously, Chief Judge Drew spoke with the commissioners and
Judge Stoebe. Chief Judge Drew does not have any "findings" or "statements."

He did confirm that Judge Stoebe will no longer chair the commission for future vacancies.

Molly

Date: 11/09/2021 04:25 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] District 2B JNC
Molly,

. Out of respect for the judicial
complaints.

1
with.

Thank you,
Michael
--
2

Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2021 1:50 PM
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] District 2B JNC
Thanks, Molly. As I said in our initial phone call two weeks ago, our investigation showed that
Judge Stoebe made significantly misleading comments to the commission that appear to have
affected its deliberative process to the point where the commissioners no longer believed they
could consider and vote for one of the applicants. As the judicial branch is unwilling to share the
substance of Chief Judge Drew’s conversation with Judge Stoebe, and thus we have no other
information than our own investigation, the Governor does not believe she can move forward
with the appointment. She will be calling on the commission shortly to begin the process anew.
Michael
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2021 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] District 2B JNC

Chief Judge Drew was in Des Moines this morning for Judicial Council. I had the
opportunity to discuss your email from yesterday afternoon with him.

As I shared with you previously, Chief Judge Drew spoke with the commissioners and
Judge Stoebe. Chief Judge Drew does not have any "findings" or "statements."

He did confirm that Judge Stoebe will no longer chair the commission for future vacancies.

Molly

Date: 11/09/2021 04:25 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] District 2B JNC
Molly,

1
. Out of respect for the judicial
complaints.

with.

Thank you,
Michael
--
2
Subject: AUTO: Scott Hand is out of the office (returning 11/12/2021 08:00 AM)
I am out of the office from 11/09/2021 04:45 PM until 11/12/2021 08:00 AM.

Note: This is an automated response to your message "[EXTERNAL] District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission" sent on
11/11/2021 01:55:08 PM.

This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.
1

To:
Subject: FW: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Attachments: 2021.11.11 Second Notice of Vacancy (District 2B).pdf
Judge Johnson,
Please see the attached letter from Governor Reynolds, which was sent to the District 2B
Judicial Nominating Commission this afternoon.
I want to emphasize to you that the investigation mentioned in the letter was ongoing at the
time of your interview with the Governor. The Governor’s decision to begin this process anew
was in no way connected to your application materials or interview, and I would encourage you
to apply again once the Commission begins accepting applications.
Thank you,
Michael
--
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Cc: Susan K Christensen <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]

Commissioners,
Please see the attached letter and Second Notice of Meeting from Governor Reynolds regarding
the current district court vacancy in Judicial Election District 2B. As indicated in the letter,
details regarding next Thursday’s meeting are forthcoming.
--
1

To: Jonathan Beaty
Jon,
Thank you,
Michael
--
[email protected];
[email protected]
[email protected]

Commissioners,
--
1

To: Murphy, Alex [IGOV]
Subject: Fwd: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
For your awareness. We can discuss tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2021 1:55:08 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>;
< [email protected]
<[email protected]>; <
< [email protected] <[email protected]>;
[email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Cc: Susan K Christensen <[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>

Commissioners,

--
1
From: Murphy, Alex [IGOV]

Subject: Fwd: seeking comment: judicial vacancy

Alex Murphy | Communications Director
Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Gov. Adam Gregg
515-802-0986 | [email protected]
www.governor.iowa.gov

From: Laura Belin <[email protected]>
To: Murphy, Alex [IGOV] <[email protected]>
Subject: seeking comment: judicial vacancy

Hello Alex,

Does the governor's office have additional comment on this letter, which was sent today to
nominating commission members?

Laura

‐‐

1705 Plaza Circle
Windsor Heights, IA 50324
(515) 276‐6971

http://www.bleedingheartland.com
1
From: < >

Subject: RE: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Dear Mr. Boal,

Thank you for providing me with this information.

Sincerely,
Derek Johnson

Sent from Mail for Windows

To:

Judge Johnson,


Thank you,
Michael
--

[email protected];
[email protected]
1
[email protected]

Commissioners,

--

2
From: Murphy, Alex [IGOV]

To: Boal, Michael [IGOV]; Craig, Sara [IGOV]
Subject: Fwd: Question on District 2b Judicial Nominating Commission

Alex Murphy | Communications Director
Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Gov. Adam Gregg
515-802-0986 | [email protected]
www.governor.iowa.gov

From: Foley, Ryan J. <[email protected]>
To: Murphy, Alex [IGOV] <[email protected]>
Subject: Question on District 2b Judicial Nominating Commission

Hi, Alex:
I got a copy of the letter the governor sent today to the District 2b JNC, rejecting the nominees for the vacancy due to
the tainted selection process she describes.
A couple of questions for you.
Will the governor’s office be seeking any additional investigation or sanctions against Judge Kurt Stoebe for his
unprofessional/biased behavior? Should he be replaced as the commission chairman?
The letter mentions that it’s only the second time in Iowa history, since Gov. Robert Ray, that a governor has rejected
nominees for a judicial opening. Do you have any details on when and why Gov. Ray took the same step?
Thank you,
Ryan Foley ‐ AP

Ryan J. Foley
News Correspondent, The Associated Press
Iowa City, IA
319‐400‐2213 (cell and Signal)
@rjfoley

The information contained in this communication is intended for the use of the designated recipients named above. If
the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this
communication in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify The Associated Press immediately by
telephone at +1‐212‐621‐1500 and delete this email. Thank you.
1
From: Timothy Gartin <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Hi Michael,

Just to be sure, I interpret "begin anew" is starting from scratch as opposed to meeting to deliberate and take
a new vote on the existing slate of applicants. I assume that we will ask applicants to re‐interview. Attorneys
who did not apply in the last round would be free to submit to this round.

Perhaps this is obvious, but I am confident I will be asked this question.

Thanks,

Tim

Timothy L. Gartin
Hastings, Gartin & Boettger, LLP
409 Duff Ave.
Ames, IA 50010
T: 515‐232‐2501 / F: 515‐232‐2525
[email protected]

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>;
< [email protected]
< [email protected] <[email protected]>;
[email protected] <[email protected]>; Timothy Gartin
Cc: Susan K Christensen <[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected]
<[email protected]>

Commissioners,

--
1
2
From: <
Subject: Re: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Michael: I want tell you and also please tell Gov. Reynolds that I truly believe that the proper approach is being made.
Most know that tough prudent decisions are sometimes required to solve issues and come to a resolve. I believe we
have a good group of 10 members in this Commission! Thanks for your attention in this matter!
Sincerely

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 11, 2021, at 1:55 PM, Boal, Michael [IGOV] <[email protected]> wrote:

Commissioners,

Please see the attached letter and Second Notice of Meeting from Governor
Reynolds regarding the current district court vacancy in Judicial Election District
2B. As indicated in the letter, details regarding next Thursday’s meeting are
forthcoming.
--
<2021.11.11 Second Notice of Vacancy (District 2B).pdf>
1
Cc: Susan K Christensen <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: 11/11/2021 01:55 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission

Commissioners,

--
2
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 4:44 PM
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Hi Michael,

The Code requires the NC to be chaired by a judge. It seems to me that as a matter of common sense he or she must be
ready, willing and able. Judge Stoebe simply told me he was willing to step aside when I asked him to. If another judge
doesn't take his place does that mean Stoebe must serve given the "required" language in the Code?

I'm passing this along to the Chief Justice so she is aware of your concerns. I'm sure someone will be in touch with you.

James M. Drew
Chief Judge
Second Judicial District

Date: 11/12/2021 04:26 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission

Chief Judge Drew,

Thank you for this update about Judge Stoebe's decision not to participate in any further
commission meetings.

It does not appear that Iowa law permits another judge besides the most senior to serve as chair
of the commission. Section 46.6 of the Iowa Code requires that the judge of the longest service in
the district serve as the chair of the commission. And if the chair is absent, section 46.5 requires
that the commissioners elect a temporary chairperson from its own membership. If Judge Stoebe
is not present at the meeting, it appears the Commission must instead elect another member as
temporary chair.

Am I overlooking something?

Thank you,
Michael

Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
1
Subject: Judicial Nominating Commission Confidentiality
Mr. Boal,
I am appalled at the press release from Governor Reynolds regarding Judge Kurt Stoebe. Does she or anyone else in
your office understand the chill that press release will have upon discussion of judicial applicants by members of the
commission for fear their comments will appear in the press. While we have many fine applicants for judicial appointment
we also have those that should not be considered for their professional or personal shortcomings. It is imperative that
members of the nominating commission feel secure in the confidentiality of their discussions.
Kurt Wilke
Senior District Court Judge
Iowa Second Judicial District

1

Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2021 9:55 AM
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission
Attachments: Notice_of_Vacancy_May.pdf
Judge,
Actually, the Code is clear that a district judicial nominating commission can operate in the
absence of a judge. Under section 46.5(4), if the senior judge is absent, the Commission elects a
temporary chair from its own members. And there is recent precedent for this practice (see
attached). In 2019, the other members of the commission in District 5C elected a temporary chair
for a selection process when the senior judge was unable to attend meetings due to medical
necessity.
But there is no authority for the next-most senior judge to serve as a member of the commission.
Our office takes no position about the propriety of the senior judge choosing to be absent from
commission meetings in the circumstances here. Unlike the participation of an unauthorized
member, that does not present any question about the lawfulness of the nomination process
resulting in two nominees for consideration by the Governor.
Thank you,
Michael
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: District 2B Judicial Nominating Commission

Hi Michael,

The Code requires the NC to be chaired by a judge. It seems to me that as a matter of common sense he or she must be
ready, willing and able. Judge Stoebe simply told me he was willing to step aside when I asked him to. If another judge
doesn't take his place does that mean Stoebe must serve given the "required" language in the Code?

I'm passing this along to the Chief Justice so she is aware of your concerns. I'm sure someone will be in touch with you.

James M. Drew
Chief Judge
Second Judicial District

1

Commissioners,

--
3

Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2021 9:56 AM
Subject: RE: Judicial Nominating Commission Confidentiality
Judge Wilke,
Thank you for reaching out. To be clear, the Governor did not issue a press release on this
matter. Her letter was sent only to Commission members, court administration, and judicial
officers. One of those individuals provided the letter to the media and the public.
And she took care to balance the privacy interests of individual applicants and the need to
explain her basis for taking her extraordinary action.
I will be sure to pass along your concerns to the Governor. Thank you,
Michael

Mr. Boal,
Kurt Wilke

1
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2021 8:03 AM
Subject: *Confidential: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Judicial Nominating Commission Confidentiality
Mr. Boal,
Thank you for your response. Whoever took it upon themselves to release that letter to the media did the nomination
process a great disservice.
Kurt Wilke

To: "Kurt.Wi [email protected]" <Kurt.Wi [email protected]>
Date: 11/13/2021 09:56 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Judicial Nominating Commission Confidentiality

Judge Wilke,
Thank you for reaching out. To be clear, the Governor did not issue a press release on this
matter. Her letter was sent only to Commission members, court administration, and judicial
officers. One of those individuals provided the letter to the media and the public.

And she took care to balance the privacy interests of individual applicants and the need to
explain her basis for taking her extraordinary action.

I will be sure to pass along your concerns to the Governor. Thank you,
Michael


Mr. Boal,
Kurt Wilke

1

--

District 2B Public Documents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

District 2B Public Documents

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

District 2B Public Documents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Boal, Michael [IGOV]

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Commission meeting 9:00 a.m.

Joseph McCarville 9:30 a.m.

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Attached is a copy of the interview schedule.

Attached is a copy of the interview schedule.

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Attached is a copy of the interview schedule.

Sorry about that, I've asked State Court to fix it.

It's all posted:

Attached is a copy of the interview schedule.

STATE OF IOWA, Case FECR123456

MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

STATE OF IOWA, Case FECR456789

Plaintiff, MOTION IN LIMINE

Arch Wilson Law, LLC

STATE OF IOWA, Case FECR987221

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO CORRECT ILLEGAL SENTENCE

Mr. Johnson, hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”, is respectfully requesting this

Double Jeopardy Clause of The United States Constitution.

overturned because the defendant was deprived of constitutionally required procedure, or if a

defendant’s conviction is overturned because of illegality, it remains an “unmitigated fiction” to

Jepsen v. State, 907 N.W.2d 495 (2018).

AGCR487563. The Defendant should be resentenced in cases FECR123456 & FECR678912

an illegal sentence, because the Court waived mandatory fines.

Arch Wilson Law, LLC

Dear Mr. Boal, Chief Justice Christensen and Ms. Kottmeyer,

From: < >

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Do you have time on Monday afternoon for a call?

Start: Mon 10/18/2021 2:00 PM

Organizer: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor, State of Iowa

Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor, State of Iowa

Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg

Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor, State of Iowa

Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg

Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor, State of Iowa

Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]

Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor, State of Iowa

Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg

Michael Boal | Senior Legal Counsel

Office of the Governor, State of Iowa

Gov. Kim Reynolds & Lt. Governor Adam Gregg

From: < >

From: Boal, Michael [IGOV]