## Facts

- Larry Joe Keeton entered a convenience store in Marshalltown, Iowa, purchased cigarettes, and when the clerk opened the register to make change, reached over the counter, grabbed twenty-dollar bills, and said, “I’ll take that.”
- Keeton moved toward the exit with the cash in his hand.
- The clerk rushed to the double doors and blocked his path, attempting to stop him from leaving.
- As Keeton approached the doors, the clerk tried to grab the money from his hand; he refused to release it, and their hands touched during the attempt.
- Keeton briefly backed away from the door and extended his arm toward the clerk, after which she stepped aside and he left; as he exited, she snatched his hat off in anger.
- Surveillance video recorded the incident and was admitted at trial.
- Keeton was charged with second-degree robbery based on the theory that he assaulted the clerk to assist his escape with the stolen money.
- Keeton waived a jury trial; the district court found him guilty and imposed a sentence not to exceed ten years’ imprisonment.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the “assault” element required for robbery under Iowa Code § 711.1(1) when the defendant used conduct toward a store clerk while escaping after a theft.
2. Whether the court should decide, beyond the sufficiency claim, whether assault under Iowa Code § 708.1 is categorically a general-intent offense.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The court held that substantial evidence supported a finding that Keeton committed an assault on the clerk within the meaning of Iowa Code § 708.1.
- The court concluded the assault occurred during Keeton’s escape from the scene of the theft, satisfying Iowa Code § 711.1(1).
- The court declined to address the State’s request for a broader ruling on whether assault is a general-intent offense because it was unnecessary to resolve the appeal.

## Legal Principles

- A conviction must be upheld if substantial evidence supports it; evidence is substantial if it would convince a rational factfinder of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt when the record is viewed as a whole.
- For robbery under Iowa Code § 711.1(1), the State must prove an intent to commit theft and an assault committed to assist or further the theft or the person’s escape from the scene, with or without the stolen property.
- Whether an assault occurred for robbery purposes is assessed by reference to the statutory definition of assault in Iowa Code § 708.1.
- Intent for assault is commonly proved by inference from conduct and surrounding circumstances rather than direct evidence.
- Conduct that implies an imminent, unwanted physical contact—together with contextual cues such as advancing toward a person who is blocking an exit and resisting attempts to reclaim property—can supply substantial evidence of an assault in furtherance of escape.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Keeton’s second-degree robbery conviction because a rational factfinder could infer from the recorded encounter at the store exit that Keeton committed an assault on the clerk to facilitate his escape with the stolen cash, and the court declined to decide any broader mens rea classification question about assault beyond what was required to resolve the sufficiency challenge.


State v. Keeton, 710 N.W.2d 531 (Iowa 2006)