Des Moines, Iowa — A woman who has a history of ending up on the wrong side of the law has won an appeal from the Iowa Supreme Court.
Kamie Jo Schiebout of Sioux Center appealed her judgment and sentence entered on a conviction of second-degree theft for writing checks on an account without authorization. Whether she took the checks and whether she used them without permission was not up for debate in this case. Court documents say the checks were on a Ducks Unlimited account, for which her ex-husband was the treasurer and an authorized signer.
Schiebout contended that there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction because the state failed to prove she knew the checks would not be paid when presented and failed to prove she received property, services, or money from the transactions. She also alleged that the jury was not properly instructed on which checks it could aggregate to find her guilty of second-degree theft and that the court erred in awarding the sheriff’s claim for reimbursement for medical aid she received while incarcerated. The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but vacated the part of the sentence dealing with the medical aid. Schiebout requested further review from the Iowa Supreme Court.
She argued that presenting a check without authorization, which was the substance of the State’s evidence, is different than providing a check one knows will not be paid when presented, which is what she was charged with. In fact, the bank continued to pay the checks until the account was overdrawn, according to court records.
The court vacated the decision of the Court of Appeals, reversed the judgment of the district court, and remanded the case for an order of dismissal.
The Supreme Court also says that with Schiebout’s conviction vacated, she cannot be held liable for the medical charges either.
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Dana Oxley wrote that the statute has, “ambiguous
language.”
