IA: Merely citing state const doesn’t mean it will be applied; argument required

The state constitution will not be followed over the Fourth Amendment unless defendant makes an explicit argument why the state rule should be different. Just citing it isn’t enough. State v. Myers, 2015 Iowa App. LEXIS 695 (August 5, 2015):

n.1: Myers mentions the Iowa Constitution in her appellate brief but does not assert that its applicability in this case differs from that of the United States Constitution. Our supreme court recently demonstrated its willingness to interpret the Iowa Constitution differently than the United States Constitution in regards to the exceptions to the warrant requirement. See State v. Gaskins, __ N.W.2d __, 2015 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 80, 2015 WL 3958499, at *4 (Iowa 2015). However, in the context of this appeal—in which Myers does not assert the state and federal constitutions operate in a distinct manner—we apply the federal standard. See State v. Kern, 831 N.W.2d 149, 174 (Iowa 2013).