## Facts

- Robert Eric Freeman agreed to sell cocaine to Keith Hatcher, who was cooperating with law enforcement.
- Hatcher paid Freeman $200, and Freeman delivered about two grams of a substance represented to be cocaine.
- Testing showed the substance was acetaminophen, which is not a controlled substance.
- Freeman believed and intended that the substance he delivered was cocaine.
- Freeman was charged and convicted in a bench trial of delivery of a simulated controlled substance represented to be cocaine under Iowa Code § 204.401(2)(a) (1987).

## Issues

1. Whether a defendant can be convicted of delivering a simulated controlled substance when he believed he was delivering and intended to deliver an actual controlled substance (cocaine).
2. Whether the statute requires proof that the defendant knew the substance was not controlled (a knowing misrepresentation), as opposed to proof that he represented it as controlled and it was in fact noncontrolled.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Iowa affirmed the conviction.
- The court held that Freeman’s belief that the substance was cocaine did not bar conviction for delivery of a simulated controlled substance.
- The court concluded the offense is satisfied where the delivered substance is not controlled and the defendant expressly or impliedly represents it to be a controlled substance.

## Legal Principles

- Under Iowa’s simulated controlled substance provisions, the relevant mental state concerns the defendant’s knowing representation of the substance as a controlled substance, not knowledge of the substance’s actual chemical composition.
- The statutory definition of “simulated controlled substance” requires (1) a noncontrolled substance and (2) an express or implied representation that it is controlled; it does not add a requirement that the defendant know the representation is false.
- A mistake of fact does not excuse criminal liability when, if the facts were as the defendant believed, the defendant would still have been guilty of a crime; believing the substance was cocaine would have made the conduct criminal under the controlled-substance delivery statute.
- The simulated-substance statute targets participation in, or the appearance of participation in, controlled-substance trafficking, rather than protecting buyers from fraud.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Freeman’s conviction, ruling that delivery of a noncontrolled substance represented as cocaine falls within the simulated controlled substance statute even when the seller mistakenly believed the substance was real cocaine.


State v. Freeman, 450 N.W.2d 826 (Iowa 1990)