STATE OF IOWA v. JESSE RICHARD DeGROOTE (2024)

On discretionary review, Jesse DeGroote challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for simple-misdemeanor assault.¹ We review for correction of errors at law; we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and are highly deferential to the jury's verdict. State v. Crawford, 972 N.W.2d 189, 202 (Iowa 2022).

The jury was instructed that, to find DeGroote guilty, the State had to prove:

1. On or about the 12th day of June, 2022, [DeGroote] did an act which was intended to cause pain or injury or result in physical contact that would be insulting or offensive.

2. [DeGroote] had the apparent ability to do the act.

DeGroote does not contest the State's undisputed evidence that he threw a punch at his uncle, William, ultimately making contact with the side of William's face. He argues his conviction should be overturned because (1) the State failed to prove the assault took place on June 12 (as opposed to June 13) and (2) William did not actually suffer pain or injury.

DeGroote's first claim fails because of “our general rule that the State is not required to prove the precise time and place of a crime.” State v. Yeo, 659 N.W.2d 544, 550 (Iowa 2003); cf. State v. Coon, No. 21-0768, 2022 WL 946985, at *1 (Iowa Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2022) (citing State v. Parmenter, No. 18-1997, 2019 WL 6907457, at *5–6 (Iowa Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2019) to distinguish between the inclusion of date ranges, which “may be elements of the crime[ ]” and the use of the phrase “on or about” which indicates the listed date is an approximation). And his second claim fails because whether William actually suffered pain and injury is inapposite—the controlling question is whether DeGroote intended to cause pain or injury (or physical contact that would be insulting or offensive) when he threw the punch. The jury is allowed to infer that an actor “intend[ed] the natural and probable consequences that usually follow from his or her voluntary act.” State v. Taylor, 689 N.W.2d 116, 132 (Iowa 2004). And “the natural consequence of swinging a closed fist ․ is to cause pain, injury” or result in physical contact that would be insulting or offensive.² State v. Tatum, No. 17-0394, 2017 WL 4570365, at *4 (Iowa Ct. App. Oct. 11, 2017).

For these reasons, substantial evidence supports DeGroote's conviction for assault. We affirm.

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Our supreme court granted DeGroote's application for discretionary review before transferring the case to us for resolution.

2.   We recognize that the canopy of the golf cart William was sitting in took the brunt of the impact; that does not change the analysis.

POTTERFIELD, Senior Judge.