No. 5-349 / 02-1072Court of Appeals of Iowa.
Filed August 17, 2005
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Amanda Potterfield, Judge.
Edward A. Grayson appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief. AFFIRMED.
Edward A. Grayson, Fort Madison, appellant pro se.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Sharon K. Hall, Assistant Attorney General, J. Patrick White, County Attorney, and Anne Lahey and Andrew Chappell, Assistant County Attorneys, for appellee.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Huitink and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Edward A. Grayson was charged with and found guilty of first-degree kidnapping in connection with the confinement of two women and the sexual assault of one of them. He appealed following imposition of sentence. Appellate counsel determined the appeal was frivolous and moved to withdraw. The Iowa Supreme Court agreed the appeal was frivolous, granted the motion, and ordered the appeal dismissed.
Grayson filed an application for post conviction relief. Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied the application. The court subsequently overruled Grayson’s post-trial motions. Grayson appealed.
Grayson’s numerous postconviction relief claims fall into three general categories. First, he alleges trial counsel was ineffective in failing to effectively cross-examine the State’s witnesses. Second, he argues counsel was ineffective in failing to argue rape kits were tampered with and in failing to adequately challenge the DNA evidence. Finally, he argues the assistant county attorney committed prosecutorial misconduct in her presentation of chain-of-custody testimony. His overarching theme is that he was framed.
We review de novo Grayson’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Ledezma v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134, 141 (Iowa 2001). A person claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must rebut the presumption that counsel was effective by showing both a failure to perform an essential duty and resulting prejudice. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 690, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2066, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 695 (1984). Claims of prosecutorial misconduct are ordinarily reviewed for an abuse of discretion. State v. Jacobs, 607 N.W.2d 679, 689 (Iowa 2000). Grayson must establish that misconduct occurred and he was so prejudiced by the misconduct that he was deprived of a fair trial. Id.
The district court thoroughly analyzed Grayson’s claims. On our review of the record, we fully concur in the court’s findings and conclusions. As Grayson failed to establish ineffectiveness of trial or appellate counsel or misconduct on the part of the assistant county attorney, we affirm the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief.
We further deny all pending motions.
AFFIRMED.