Daniel Murillo v. State of Iowa

Summary

The court held that a Department of Corrections certificate established that Murillo successfully completed his required sex-offender treatment program for purposes of the statutory threshold, and the district court erred by reconsidering the sincerity of his admissions. The court nevertheless held that the district court acted within its discretion in denying registry modification because Murillo's inconsistent acceptance of responsibility and perceived need for further treatment were relevant to reoffense risk and public safety. The court vacated the court of appeals' decision and affirmed the district court's judgment.