Court grants Zyriah Schlitter new trial based on lawyer’s errors

Zyriah Schlitter, convicted in the 2010 child abuse death of his 18-month-old daughter and serving a 50-year-prison term, will get a new trial because his defense attorney was not effective enough at his trial, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday.

Justices granted a new trial for Schlitter, 29, of Cedar Rapids, based on his attorney's error of not asking the trial judge for an acquittal on one of four theories laid out about who committed the child abuse and how to prove child endangerment resulting in death.

The court's ruling, however, is confusing about just how expansive a new trial would be. Schlitter was convicted of child endangerment and involuntary manslaughter in the death of his daughter, Kamryn.

First Assistant Linn County Attorney Nick Maybanks said the ruling was unclear but believes the 'involuntary conviction was affirmed, because in the final paragraph they only reference the child endangerment conviction being reversed.”

Maybanks declined further comment, including whether he'd retry the case.

Appellate defense attorneys Mark Smith and Shellie Knipfer, who argued for Schlitter, were unavailable for comment Friday.

Schlitter was found guilty in 2012. Testimony showed Kamryn died from severe head injuries caused by shaking or slamming.

According to testimony, Schlitter and ex-girlfriend Amy Parmer, 29, of Hiawatha, either individually or jointly inflicted the fatal injuries and knowingly permitted the other to abuse her or failed to protect the child from the other. Parmer was convicted in 2013 of child endangerment resulting in death and involuntary manslaughter.

Chief Justice Mark Cady, writing the ruling, said the court found the prosecution didn't prove Schlitter inflicted the deadly force necessary to cause the toddler's injuries, which is one of the theories the state argued for child endangerment.

'Such a finding could only be based on speculation,” the court stated.

The ruling went on to say the evidence didn't reasonably show that Schlitter committed the violent acts or had sole care of the child when the injuries were inflicted.

When Kamryn exhibited the first and second set of bruises, there were numerous people other than Schlitter who had cared for her including Parmer, day care providers, her mother and several members of Schlitter's family, the court said.

Schlitter also wasn't with Kamryn during the two hours leading up to a 911 call before her death, according to testimony at trial. Parmer was taking care of her at the time. And there was no testimony that Schlitter had inflicted unreasonable force or had shaken Kamryn before.

The jury shouldn't have been instructed to consider this possibility, the court stated. A new trial must be granted and cannot include this theory of the crime of child endangerment - but may still advance three other scenarios presented at trial.

The ruling notes jurors didn't have to specify which theory they believed occurred. The justices did find that a reasonable jury could have convicted Schlitter on the other three alternatives of child endangerment presented at trial.