E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR BUCHANAN COUNTY

STATE OF IOWA, CASE NO. FECR081656

Plaintiff,
vs. MR. SOULES FIRST MOTION IN
LIMINE
CHRISTOPHER DOUGLAS SOULES,

Defendant.

COMES NOW, Christopher Soules, by and through his undersigned counsel, and

hereby moves this Court to enter an Order excluding the following evidence, testimony,

and argument from presentation or reference before the jury in this case, and in support

thereof, respectfully submits the following:

1. Mr. Soules respectfully submits that the matters enumerated are

fundamentally inadmissible under the Iowa Rules of Evidence. Permitting interrogation

of witnesses, comments to prospective and impaneled jurors from counsel or witnesses,

or offers of evidence concerning these matters would prejudice the jury, and sustaining

objections to such questions, comments, evidence, testimony, or offers would not cure

such prejudice, but would merely reinforce the impact of such prejudicial matters on the

jurors. Therefore, an Order preventing attorneys for the State of Iowa, or any witness to

be called in this case, from referencing impermissible and inadmissible evidence set forth,

infra, is the only safe method to ensure a fair trial for Mr. Soules.

2. Mr. Soules asserts the following matters are not admissible for any purpose

in this cause:

a. Any reference to the decedent as the victim during trial. Mr. Soules, like

all other accused persons in the State of Iowa, is presumed innocent. He is entitled to this

presumption under both the federal constitution and state law. U.S. Const. amend. XIV;
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Iowa Code 701.3; see also In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364, 90 S.Ct. 1068 (1970)

(Due process commands that no man shall lose his liberty unless the Government has

borne the burden of . . . convincing the fact-finder of his guilt.) (citation omitted); State v.

Robertson, 351 N.W.2d 790, 791 (Iowa 1984). In many criminal casesfor example, in

most homicide casesthere is no dispute about whether a crime was committed or

whether the alleged victim was, in fact, a victim. The disputed issues are generally the

degree of homicide committed or the identity of the perpetrator. By contrast, the instant

case presents a fundamental dispute as to whether Mr. Soules violated his reporting

obligations following his alleged involvement in a motor vehicle accident. The State has

not charged Mr. Soules with any crime asserting he is criminally responsible for the death

of the decedent. Thus, it is wholly improper for the State or any witness to refer to the

decedent as a victim since such a reference inaccurately characterizes the events

relevant to the instant charge and would not have any tendency to make the existence of

any fact that is of consequence to the determination of this action more probable or less

probable than it would be without the evidence and is more prejudicial than probative, will

cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the jury as finders of fact. See Iowa Rules

of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403. Furthermore, such reference prejudicially implies

the speakers opinion that Mr. Soules criminally caused the death, evidencing a bias

against the him which violates his right to a fair trial, due process, and the presumption of

innocence. See State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860, 874 (Iowa 2003) (finding a

prosecutors interjecting personal opinion on defendants credibility and guilt improper);

see also State v. Wright, 2003 WL 21509033, at *2 (Ohio App. 2003) (The court was

compelled to note that the trial court should refrain from using the term victim, as it

2
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

suggests a bias against the defendant before the State has proven a victim truly exists);

Allen v. State, 644 A.2d 982, 983 n.1 (Del. 1994) (recognizing that the use of the term

victim by a prosecutor at trial was improper and should be avoided); Jackson v. State,

600 A.2d 21, 24 (Del. 1991) ([T]he word victim should not be used in a case where the

commission of a crime is in dispute.).

b. Any evidence, testimony, reference, or argument that, on the night in

question, Mr. Soules: 1) purchased alcohol, 2) consumed alcohol, 2) drove while

impaired, or 3) had beer cans in or around his vehicle. According to a report issued by

the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigations (DCI) Criminalistics Laboratory, Mr.

Soules specimens were negative for drugs and alcohol. The DCI conducted thorough

toxicology testing on two separate samples his urine and blood and conclusively

determined no detectable amounts of alcohol or drugs were in either specimen.

Furthermore, Mr. Soules has not been charged with any alcohol related offense. Rather,

Mr. Soules has been charged with leaving the scene of a fatal accident. The issues to be

resolved include:

- Whether Mr. Soules was the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident on April

24, 2017 in Buchanan County, Iowa;

- Whether Mr. Soules immediately stopped his vehicle at the scene, or as close

as possible thereto;

- Whether the accident resulted in a serious injury to the other party;

- Whether Mr. Soules rendered reasonable assistance to the person injured in

the accident including arranging for medical treatment of the injured party;

3
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

- Whether the injured party died prior to Mr. Soules allegedly departing the

scene, thereby triggering the additional reporting requirements codified by Iowa

Code Section 321.263(2) which include leaving a drivers license, automobile

registration receipt, or other identification data and informing law enforcement

authorities where Mr. Soules could be located.

See Iowa Code Sections 321.261 and 321.263. Based upon these elements, the

introduction of any evidence or argument related to purported alcohol ingestion, purported

alcohol impairment, or alleged on-site beer cans does not have any tendency to make the

existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of this action more

probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence and is more prejudicial

than probative, will cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the jury as finders of

fact. See Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403. Finally, this information is

inadmissible on the grounds it is speculative, the witnesses lack personal knowledge,

invades the province of the jury, and the witnesses lack personal knowledge.

c. Similarly, any evidence, testimony, reference, or argument relating to

requests for, and responses to, standardized field sobriety testing, preliminary breath

testing, and/or Datamaster DMT testing. For the reasons stated supra, this information

does not have any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to

the determination of this action more probable or less probable than it would be without

the evidence and is more prejudicial than probative, will cause confusion of the issues

and will mislead the jury as finders of fact. See Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and

5.403.

4
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

d. Any evidence, testimony, reference, or argument relating to the search

warrant and subsequent search of Mr. Soules residence, curtilage, and outbuildings as

well as any items seized therefrom. For the reasons stated supra, the search revealed

no information material to the present prosecution and does not have any tendency to

make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of this action

more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence and is more

prejudicial than probative, will cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the jury as

finders of fact. See Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403.

e. Any evidence, testimony, reference, or argument relating to the search

warrant for Mr. Soules, chemical specimens, or both. For the reasons stated supra, the

search revealed no information material to the present prosecution and does not have

any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the

determination of this action more probable or less probable than it would be without the

evidence and is more prejudicial than probative, will cause confusion of the issues and

will mislead the jury as finders of fact. See Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and

5.403.

f. Any evidence, testimony, reference, or argument relating to the

circumstances surrounding Mr. Soules arrest. For the reasons stated supra, the search

revealed no information material to the present prosecution and does not have any

tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination

of this action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence and

is more prejudicial than probative, will cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the

jury as finders of fact. See Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403.

5
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

g. Any evidence, testimony, reference, or argument relating to Mr. Soules

legal right to consult with an attorney. Additionally, any evidence, testimony, reference,

or argument relating to his lawful exercise of his right to consult with counsel. For the

reasons stated supra, the information does not have any tendency to make the existence

of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of this action more probable or

less probable than it would be without the evidence and is more prejudicial than probative,

will cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the jury as finders of fact. See Iowa

Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403.

h. Any implication that consulting with legal counsel indicates or establishes

guilt. Zemina v. Solem, 573 F2d 1027 (8th Cir. 1978).

i. Any publication of Mr. Soules booking photograph or other depictions of

him in county issued detention clothing. This evidence does not have any tendency to

make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of this action

more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence and is more

prejudicial than probative, will cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the jury as

finders of fact. See Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403.

j. Any statement, questioning, or evidence about Mr. Soules criminal history.

Any such reference is inadmissible under Iowa Rules of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, 5.403,

5.404, 5.608, and 5.609.

k. Any opinion testimony from witnesses as it relates to the ultimate issues

being decided by the jury, as fact finders. Allowing such opinion testimony is tantamount

to allowing law enforcement to express an opinion either directly or indirectly that

essentially expresses an opinion on guilt or innocence which goes beyond the scope of

6
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

being factual evidence and is forbidden under Iowa law. See State v. Myers, 382 N.W.2d

91 (Iowa 1986). This information does not have any tendency to make the existence of

any fact that is of consequence to the determination of this action more probable or less

probable than it would be without the evidence and is more prejudicial than probative, will

cause confusion of the issues and will mislead the jury as finders of fact. See Iowa Rules

of Evidence 5.401, 5.402, and 5.403. Finally, this information is inadmissible on the

grounds it is speculative, invades the province of the jury, and the witnesses lack personal

knowledge.

l. Any reference to any exercise of Mr. Soules right to remain silent. Griffin

v. California, 380 US 609 (1986); Wainwright v. Greenfield, 474 US 284 (1986); Doyle v.

Ohio, 426 US 610 (1976); See also State v. Bishop, 387N.W.2d 554 (Iowa 1986).

m. Any evidence or testimony exceeding the scope of minutes of testimony or

any supplemental or additional minutes of testimony. State v. Walker, 281N.W.2d 612

(Iowa 1979).

n. Any statement of personal opinion on Mr. Soules guilt. State v. Vickroy,

205 N.W.2d 748, 750 (Iowa 1973).

WHEREFORE, the Mr. Soules respectfully requests this Court to enter an Order

which:

1. Instructs the attorney(s) for the State, and their witnesses, to refrain from

making any mention, referring to, reading of the pleadings, statement of the case,

interrogation of the witnesses, testimony from the witnesses, argument, or in any manner

whatsoever, any of the matters set forth herein, unless specifically permitted to do so by

ruling of the Court.

7
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

2. Instructs the attorney(s) for the State of Iowa to inform any and all witnesses

called by, or on behalf of, the State of Iowa to refrain from mentioning or referring to, in

any way, any of the matters set forth herein, unless specifically permitted to do so by

ruling of the Court.

3. Instructs the attorneys for the State of Iowa that violation of any of these

instructions may very well cause harm to Mr. Soules and deprive him of a fair and impartial

trial, and the failure to abide by such instructions may:

a. Constitute contempt of Court;

b. Result in the granting of a Motion for New Trial;

c. Result in a mistrial; or

d. Create potential reversible error on appeal.

PARRISH KRUIDENIER DUNN BOLES GRIBBLE

GENTRY BROWN & BERGMANN, L.L.P.

By: __/s/ Brandon Brown _______________

Alfredo Parrish AT0006051
Brandon Brown AT0001199
Gina Messamer AT0011823
2910 Grand Avenue
Des Moines, Iowa 50312
Telephone: (515) 284-5737
Facsimile: (515) 284-1704
Email: aparrish@parrishlaw.com
Email: bbrown@parrishlaw.com
Email: gmessamer@parrishlaw.com
ATTORNEYS FOR CHRISTOPHER SOULES
PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was served upon all parties to the above cause by:
() personal service () first class mail
() certified mail, return receipt requested () facsimile
() Airborne Express (overnight) (X) electronic filing
() e-mail
on June 16, 2017.
I declare that the statements above are true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief.

/s/ Anita Soderblom

8
 E-FILED 2017 JUN 16 12:00 PM BUCHANAN - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Copies to:

Shawn M. Harden
Buchanan County Attorney
210 5th Avenue NE
P.O. Box 68
Independence, Iowa 50644-0068
Phone: (319) 334-3710
Fax: (319) 334-6591
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF