Attorneys representing Ilias Lasley, 31, of Ankeny, Iowa, formally filed a request for a new trial on Monday, July 6, 2026, just two days before his scheduled sentencing. This significant legal maneuver comes after a jury in Marshall County found Mr. Lasley guilty of second-degree murder in the death of Frances Gasca on May 22, 2026.

The motion, submitted to the Iowa District Court for Marshall County by defense attorneys Christine Branstad and David Newkirk, asserts that the verdict is inconsistent with the evidence presented during the trial and that Mr. Lasley did not receive a fair and impartial proceeding. The filing seeks to vacate the conviction and secure a fresh opportunity for Mr. Lasley to present his case, challenging the jury’s findings ahead of his sentencing hearing slated for this Friday, July 10, 2026.

Defense Challenges Jury Verdicts as Irreconcilable

The core of the defense’s motion for a new trial hinges on the argument that the jury’s verdicts were logically inconsistent and irreconcilable with the evidence presented. Mr. Lasley was originally charged with two counts of first-degree murder for the deaths of Frances Gasca and Mario Murillo, both of Marshalltown, who were each shot seven times in April 2024.

During the trial, the jury acquitted Mr. Lasley of Mario Murillo’s death. Concurrently, they reduced the charge related to Frances Gasca’s death from first-degree murder to second-degree murder, finding him guilty of that lesser offense. To secure a conviction for second-degree murder, the prosecution was required to prove that Mr. Lasley acted with malice aforethought and intentionally shot Ms. Gasca.

Defense attorneys Branstad and Newkirk contend that these verdicts are fundamentally contradictory. Their request states, “The verdict does not make sense with the evidence presented at trial.” They argue that if the jury believed Mr. Lasley was justified in firing, that justification should logically extend to both shootings, given the single incident. Alternatively, if the jury concluded another shooter killed Mario Murillo, this finding would directly contradict the state’s theory and evidence, thereby undermining any basis for concluding Mr. Lasley acted with malice aforethought toward Ms. Gasca.

The defense further elaborated on the lack of evidence indicating that either Mario Murillo or Frances Gasca possessed a firearm that would justify Mr. Lasley’s actions. This implies that any justification for shooting would necessarily stem from the actions of a third party, a theory heavily implied during the trial to involve Raul Ricardo Mares Rodriguez, Ms. Gasca’s boyfriend. The attorneys cited an Iowa Supreme Court ruling, State v. Halstead, which found a conviction for one person’s death in a vehicular homicide case, but not another’s, to be factually inconsistent, bolstering their argument.

Procedural Timing and Legal Standards for a New Trial

A motion for a new trial is a post-conviction legal filing that asks the court to set aside a jury’s verdict and order a new trial. Such motions are typically filed after a guilty verdict but before sentencing. The timing of this request, just days before Mr. Lasley’s scheduled sentencing on Friday, July 10, 2026, underscores its urgency and the defense’s commitment to challenging the conviction.

In the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Judge Bethany Currie, who presided over Mr. Lasley’s eight-day trial, will now consider the merits of this motion. The court must assess whether the defense has demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant a new trial, which commonly include claims of legal errors, newly discovered evidence, or, as argued here, verdicts that are contrary to the weight of the evidence or legally inconsistent. The decision on such a motion can significantly alter the trajectory of a case, potentially leading to a new trial or proceeding directly to sentencing if denied.

The legal standard for granting a new trial is stringent. Courts generally presume the regularity of jury proceedings and verdicts. However, when a defense can demonstrate a clear and fundamental inconsistency that undermines the integrity of the verdict, a new trial may be deemed necessary to ensure justice. This process highlights the meticulous preparation required in complex legal cases, where understanding essential questions to ask before hiring legal counsel is paramount for defendants.

The Original Trial and Convictions

The trial of Ilias Lasley concluded on May 22, 2026, with a 12-member jury delivering its verdicts. Mr. Lasley, who maintained a stoic demeanor throughout the proceedings, was found guilty of second-degree murder in the death of Frances Gasca. This conviction carries a maximum penalty of 50 years in prison, classified as a Class B felony under Iowa law.