Iowa Judicial Branch
 
About the Courts
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Judges
Court of Appeals Opinions
Email Notification Service
Recent Opinions
Summaries for Most Recent Opinions
Opinions Expected
Opinions Archive
2017 Court Calendar
Oral Argument Schedule
Request for Speaker
District Courts
Juvenile Court
Business Court
Small Claims Courts
Jury Service
Directories
Advisory Committees

SUMMARIES OF DECISIONS, IOWA COURT OF APPEALS 

September 13, 2017 

  

Pursuant to Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.904(2)(6), an unpublished opinion of the Iowa Court  

of Appeals may be cited in a brief; however, unpublished opinions shall not constitute controlling  

legal authority. 

  

  

No. 15-0982 

 

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

 

STATE v. BULLOCK 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, William L. Dowell and Mary Ann Brown, Judges.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., McDonald, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (7 pages)  

  

            Daunte Dominique Bullock appeals from a district court order entered on his motion to correct illegal sentence.  The supreme court granted his motion for delayed appeal and transferred the case to this court.  Bullock contends the district court erred in assessing him court costs and attorney fees without making a determination of his reasonable ability to pay and argues any delay in raising the issue is attributable to ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: This claim must first be made to the district court.  We dismiss the appeal. 

   

  

No. 15-1815 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

MOON v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Gary G. Kimes, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., McDonald, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Martin Moon appeals the district court's summary dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief (PCR) based on the applicable statute of limitations.  He claims the ground-of-fact exception applies to this case.  OPINION HOLDS: Even if the alleged ground of fact could not have been raised earlier, we conclude this ground of fact lacks the necessary nexus with the conviction.  The affidavit submitted does not have the potential to qualify as material evidence because it only impeaches the credibility of another witness.  Because the affidavit submitted does not satisfy the ground-of-fact exception to the statute of limitations, we affirm the district court's summary dismissal of Moon's second PCR application. 

  

No. 16-0013 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF BOUCHER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Chad A. Kepros, Judge.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Mullins, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Cantana Boucher appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage to Scott Boucher, claiming the district court erred in failing to grant a motion for new trial based on the ineffective assistance of her counsel, challenging the property distribution ordered by the court as inequitable, and claiming the court erred in allowing the dissolution proceedings to continue while a temporary conservatorship was in place.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review of the issues properly raised on appeal, we affirm the dissolution decree entered by the district court. 

  

No. 16-0117 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. LEPON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Michael J. Moon, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (30 pages)  

  

            Leigh LePon appeals from his conviction for murder in the second degree.  LePon raises a number of claims of error, both through his appellate attorney and pro se.  He maintains: (1) the charges against him should have been dismissed due to violation of the speedy-indictment rule; (2) the district court was wrong to deny his motion to suppress; (3) his constitutional rights were violated when the district court allowed the State to dismiss some of the charges against him before trial; (4) the district court abused its discretion in allowing the assistant medical examiner to testify about the manner of death, Sadie Book to testify about LePon's prior bad acts—his use of methamphetamine on the night in question, and the State's expert Kenneth Martin to testify at all; (5) the court should have granted LePon's motion for mistrial after the medical examiner testified the type of wound suffered by the deceased "usually implies intent"; (6) the court erred in finding there was sufficient evidence to support the malice-aforethought element for murder; (7) an evidentiary hearing is warranted to investigate his allegations of prosecutorial misconduct; and (8) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to recall Book in order to establish her bias before the jury and for failing to challenge the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Having found no reversible claim of error, we affirm LePon's conviction for murder in the second degree.  

  

No. 16-0165 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

NORTH v. VAN DYKE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Michael J. Moon, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (12 pages)  

  

            Douglas Van Dyke appeals following a jury verdict in favor of Eunice North on claims for trespass, loss of lateral support, and loss of trees.  Van Dyke asserts the district court should have (1) directed a verdict in his favor on North's loss-of-tree claim, (2) included additional language in a jury instruction on the measure of damages for trespass and loss of lateral support,  (3) granted a new trial on the trespass claim on the ground that the "verdict for encroachment and/or trespass [was] not supported by substantial evidence and [was] contrary to the jury instruction capping damages," and (4) exercised equitable jurisdiction and considered an equitable remedy.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, concluding (1) substantial evidence supports a finding of willfulness; the district court did not err in denying Van Dyke's directed verdict motion, (2) the district court instructed the jury on the diminution-of-value theory of damages and the jury heard evidence on this theory, (3) the jury's damage award was supported by substantial evidence, and (4) North had an adequate remedy at law; equity did not need to be invoked. 

  

No. 16-0359 

 

CONVICTION AND JUDGMENT AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED. 

 

STATE v. BROWN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey L. Poulson, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  Special Concurrence by Tabor, J.  (11 pages)  

  

            Isiac Brown appeals his conviction and sentence for second-degree theft as an habitual offender.  He contends (1) the district court erred in finding sufficient evidence to support a conviction for second-degree theft, (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the habitual-offender enhancement, (3) his trial attorney was ineffective in failing to protect a claimed right to a jury trial on the sentencing enhancement, and (4) the sentence imposed was partially illegal.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the conviction and habitual-offender enhancement were supported by substantial evidence and Brown waived his right to a jury trial on sentencing enhancement.  We therefore affirm his conviction of second-degree theft as an habitual offender.  However, because the court imposed a partially illegal sentence, we vacate the sentence in part and remand for entry of a corrected sentencing order.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I agree with the majority's conclusion on all issues, but I write separately because I respectfully disagree with the majority's description of the proof necessary to convict Brown of exercising control over stolen property under Iowa Code section 714.1(4) (2015).  My concern is that under the majority's formulation, the State could opt to charge every joyriding incident as exercising control over stolen property rather than by taking under section 714.1(1) and thereby avoid its obligation to show any deprivation of the owner's right to the property.  But because the district court was correct in finding the State offered substantial evidence to prove the car was stolen, I concur in the judgment.  

  

No. 16-0518 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

WRIGHT v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica L. Ackley, Judge.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (17 pages)  

  

            A defendant challenges the district court's denial of his application for postconviction relief.  He contends his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress, for failing to prepare him to testify adequately, for failing to impeach a witness, for failing to request a jury instruction on justification, and because of the cumulative effect of these alleged errors.  OPINION HOLDS: The suppression claim is waived and was decided in an earlier appeal by this defendant.  We find counsel did prepare the defendant adequately.  The impeaching evidence the defendant points to has minimal utility, and impeaching the witness at issue would also not have much impact because several witnesses corroborated that witness's testimony.  The justification instruction is not supported by the evidence at trial.  We conclude the defendant's individual claims fail and conclude his cumulative-error claim fails as well.  

  

No. 16-0565 

 

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED IN PART. 

 

STATE v. MALLETT 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, George L. Stigler, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Doyle, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Goodhue, S.J.  (11 pages)  

  

            Riley Augustus Mallett appeals from a verdict of guilty on a charge of first-degree robbery.  OPINION HOLDS: I. We remand for the trial court to apply the weight-of-the-evidence standard in determining if a new trial should be granted.  II. Mallet fails to show the sentence he received violates the federal and state constitutions' prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishment.  III. Mallet's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims are without merit. 

  

No. 16-0575 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. HENDERSON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, George L. Stigler, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Doyle, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Goodhue, S.J.  (10 pages)  

  

            K'Von James Henderson appeals from a verdict of guilty on a charge of first-degree robbery.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Substantial evidence supports Henderson's conviction where the record shows Henderson and the other participants met the night and day before the robbery, numerous calls were made between Henderson and the other participants immediately before the robbery, Henderson was in the home of a participant with the proceeds of the robbery, and Henderson asked another person to misrepresent his location at the time of the robbery.  II. The claims raised in Henderson's pro se brief are waived or without merit.  To the extent Henderson has raised claims of ineffective assistance of his trial counsel, the record is sufficient for us to determine he cannot show counsel breached an essential duty that prejudiced Henderson. 

  

No. 16-0594 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. WILLIAMS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Thomas G. Reidel, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Mullins, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (4 pages)  

  

            A defendant challenges his sentence for theft.  He argues the district court abused its discretion in denying his third motion to continue the sentencing hearing and in imposing a sentence of up to five years.  OPINION HOLDS: We do not find the court abused its discretion.  The defendant was given the opportunity to satisfy requirements of a plea deal before and during the two continuances he was given.  Denying the third continuance was not an abuse of discretion.  The sentence imposed was not an abuse of discretion.  The court considered permissible factors and imposed sentence in accordance with the crime.  We therefore affirm.  

  

No. 16-0642 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

KIRKLAND v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Deanthony Kirkland appeals the district court's denial of his applications for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Kirkland's trial counsel was ineffective by failing to timely file an appeal, but the underlying claim that the traffic stop was pretextual has no merit.  We also find Kirkland's counsel was not ineffective for failing to: (1) file a motion to suppress, (2) object during opening statements, (3) object to the admissibility of a gun found in Kirkland's home, and (4) object to the same judge presiding at both the underlying criminal trial and at the postconviction hearing. 

  

No. 16-0647 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. PLUMMER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, George L. Stigler, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., Tabor, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Goodhue, S.J.  (9 pages)  

  

            Cody Alexander Plummer appeals from a verdict of guilty on a charge of first-degree robbery.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports a finding Plummer was guilty of first-degree robbery.  Plummer not only knew a gun was involved, but as an aider and abettor and an active participant, he was subject to being charged, tried, and punished as a principle.  Because the record is inadequate to resolve the allegation of ineffective assistance counsel based on a lack of pretrial motions and waiving the record of the voir dire, we preserve these claims for possible postconviction relief.  His remaining allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel are without merit. 

  

No. 16-0694 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. RANKIN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Gregory D. Brandt and William A. Price, District Associate Judges.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Bower, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Goodhue, S.J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Gerald Rankin appeals the sentence imposed on his conviction for reckless use of a firearm.  OPINION HOLDS: There is no indication the district court relied on improper evidence in sentencing Rankin.  The written record adequately states the court's reasons for imposing the sentence.  Because Rankin's claims have no merit, we affirm. 

  

No. 16-0808 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. ARNESON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Gary L. McMinimee, Kurt L. Wilke, and Thomas J. Bice, Judges.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (11 pages)  

  

            James Arneson appeals his convictions on two counts of third-degree sexual abuse following a jury trial.  He contends (1) there was insufficient evidence of a sex act, (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the age-disparity element on the second count, (3) the district court erred in admitting hearsay evidence and allowing a law enforcement officer to arguably vouch for the credibility of the child who made the allegations, (4) the district court should have granted his motion to suppress a police interview under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article I, section 10 of the Iowa Constitution, and (5) his trial attorney was ineffective in failing to move for suppression of products of the police interview under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution and article I, sections 8 and 9 of the Iowa Constitution.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude: (1) there was sufficient evidence to support the sex-act element for both counts, (2) the evidence was sufficient to support the age-disparity element on the second count, (3) the admission of the challenged hearsay evidence was not prejudicial, (4) the district court properly denied the motion to suppress, and (5) Arneson's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims should be preserved for postconviction relief.  We therefore affirm Arneson's convictions as to both counts and preserve his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for postconviction relief. 

  

No. 16-0825 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

MCALISTER v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John M. Wright, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Potterfield, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Goodhue, S.J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Lucas A. McAlister was convicted of first-degree robbery.  McAlister appeals the district court decision denying his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: McAlister has failed to show he received ineffective assistance on his claims defense counsel (1) failed to pursue a plea agreement in a timely fashion and failed to advise him of the pitfalls of going to trial, and (2) failed to effectively investigate medical evidence or file a motion for new trial.  We affirm the decision of the district court. 

  

No. 16-0858 

 

SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING. 

 

STATE v. HAUCK 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Gregory D. Brandt, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., Bower, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (7 pages)  

  

            Brett Hauck sought discretionary review of the conditions imposed upon him as part of his probationary sentence following his guilty plea to assault causing bodily injury or mental illness.  He claims the court abused its discretion when it imposed sex offender treatment as a condition of his probation.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court abused its discretion by considering unadmitted facts when determining Hauck's sentence and also conclude there is not a sufficient nexus between the crime and requirement Hauck complete sex offender treatment as part of his probation.  We therefore vacate Hauck's sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge. 

  

No. 16-0898 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

BRODENE v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Potterfield, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Goodhue, S.J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Raymond Brodene appeals the district court's decision denying his sixth application for postconviction relief on the ground it was untimely.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court's decision denying Brodene's application for postconviction relief. 

  

No. 16-1058 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

ROSS v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Marsha A. Bergan, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Mullins, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (6 pages)  

  

            An applicant appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  He argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel because he was pressured into entering a guilty plea and his plea lacked a factual basis.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no evidence of coercion, and we conclude the plea had an objective factual basis that was adequately explained to the defendant.  His claims fail.  

  

No. 16-1103 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

ROSS v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark J. Smith, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Bower, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Aki Ross appeals from the district court's denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  OPINION HOLDS: Ross raises a claim on appeal that he did not raise before the PCR court, and he does not raise the claim under the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel framework.  Thus, Ross's claim is not preserved for our review, and we affirm.  

  

No. 16-1123 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

KILLINGS v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Mary Pat Gunderson and Lawrence P. McLellan, Judges.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Bower, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, P.J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Allen Killings appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR), challenging the PCR court's ruling denying his request for appointment of new PCR counsel, as well as the court's determination to combine the PCR case with Killings's other pending PCR matter.  opinion holds: Because we find the PCR court did not abuse its discretion in denying Killings's requests for the appointment of a new attorney or in hearing the two cases one after the other, we affirm the PCR court's ruling denying Killings's PCR application. 

  

No. 16-1140 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STEEN v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Davis County, Joel E. Yates, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Larry Steen appeals the district court's denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We find trial counsel was effective and made legitimate strategic decisions. 

  

No. 16-1175 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. MONCIVAIZ 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Timothy J. Finn, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., Potterfield, J., Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (11 pages)  

  

            Roman Moncivaiz appeals from his convictions for robbery in the first degree and assault with intent to inflict serious injury.  Moncivaiz asserts two claims on appeal: (1) there is insufficient evidence supporting his convictions; and (2) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to improper closing argument.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict.  Additionally, we find counsel did not breach an essential duty, thus counsel is not ineffective for failing to object to the closing argument. 

  

No. 16-1190 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STACY v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 pages)  

  

            Philip Stacy appeals the district court decision denying his application for postconviction relief from his convictions for second-degree sexual abuse and lascivious acts with a child.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Stacy has failed to show he received ineffective assistance from defense counsel or postconviction counsel.  We affirm the decision of the district court. 

  

No. 16-1241 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. TURNER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Kim M. Riley, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (14 pages)  

  

            Brice Turner appeals from the judgment entered following a verdict of guilty on charges of eluding and operating while intoxicated.  He argues his constitutional rights were violated and insufficient evidence supports his convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Turner has failed to show a violation of his constitutional rights on any issue properly before us and sufficient evidence supports his convictions, we affirm.  

  

No. 16-1263 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. ROBISON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, James C. Bauch, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (3 pages)  

  

            James Robison appeals from the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss.  Robison collaterally attacks prior convictions and a prior involuntary commitment, arguing the fees and fines resulting from the prior "invalid" results caused him to incur the new charges.  OPINION HOLDS: The motion to dismiss his recent charges does not allow Robison to collaterally attack his prior convictions and commitment.  The district court properly denied Robison's motion to dismiss.  

  

No. 16-1307 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. ROBISON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, James C. Bauch, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (3 pages)  

  

            James Robison appeals from the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss.  Robison collaterally attacks prior convictions and a prior involuntary commitment, arguing the fees and fines resulting from the prior "invalid" results caused him to incur the new charges.  OPINION HOLDS: The motion to dismiss his recent charges does not allow Robison to collaterally attack his prior convictions and commitment.  The district court properly denied Robison's motion to dismiss.  

  

No. 16-1324 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. ROBISON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, James C. Bauch, Judge, and Joseph M. Moothart, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            James Robison appeals from the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss.  Robison collaterally attacks prior convictions and a prior involuntary commitment, arguing the fees and fines resulting from the prior "invalid" results caused him to incur the new charges.  OPINION HOLDS: The motion to dismiss his recent charges does not allow Robison to collaterally attack his prior convictions and commitment.  The district court properly denied Robison's motion to dismiss.  

  

No. 16-1326 

 

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF AREVALO-LUNA 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David M. Porter, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Erenia Arevalo appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage to Edgar Arevalo-Luna.  Erenia maintains the district court should have awarded her spousal support as she requested.  She also asks that we award her $1500 in appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on our de novo review of the factors in Iowa Code section 598.21A (2014), we modify the dissolution decree to award Erenia permanent spousal support.  We award Erenia $400 monthly in spousal support beginning on June 1, 2018, with the award increasing to $600 following the high school graduation of Erenia's and Edgar's youngest child.  We decline to award Erenia appellate attorney fees.  

  

No. 16-1392 

 

REVERSED AND REMANDED. 

 

KRAKLIO v. SIMMONS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, J. Hobart Darbyshire, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Mullins, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  Dissent by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (14 pages)  

  

            Ray Kraklio sued one of his criminal defense attorneys, Kent Simmons, alleging Simmons was liable for malpractice in sentencing proceedings.  The district court granted summary relief to Simmons, citing Barker v. Capotosto, 875 N.W.2d 157, 161 (Iowa 2016) (requiring defendant to achieve relief from a conviction before advancing a legal malpractice action against former attorney).  Kraklio appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: Kraklio's case calls for a logical extension of Barker, not a literal application of Barker's "relief from conviction" language.  On our reading of the policy considerations guiding the Barker decision, we determine the same policy considerations support a finding the "prior relief" requirement in this criminal legal malpractice action was satisfied when the district court in the probation-revocation proceeding declared Kraklio's probation had ended.  Accordingly, we determine the district court erred, reverse the grant of summary judgment, and remand for further proceedings without prejudice for the district court to consider issues not addressed in its summary judgment ruling.  DISSENT ASSERTS: The district court did not error in granting summary judgment in favor of Simmons because Kraklio did not obtain criminal relief on the grounds he alleged in his legal malpractice action. 

  

No. 16-1394 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

ALVAREZ MENDOZA v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, John J. Haney, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (9 pages)  

  

            Diego Alvarez Mendoza appeals a district court order denying his writ of habeas corpus.  He contends (1) precluding him from seeking habeas corpus relief is in violation of the Iowa Constitution, (2) Iowa Code chapters 663 and 822 (2014) violate equal protection, and (3) he should have been advised that his request for and receipt of a deferred judgment would act as a waiver of his rights to postconviction and habeas corpus relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude (1) Alvarez was not entitled to habeas corpus relief under the Iowa Constitution or Iowa Code chapter 663 because he was not restrained of his liberty by the State of Iowa, (2) Iowa Code chapters 663 and 822 do not violate equal protection because they do not treat similarly situated individuals differently, and (3) Alvarez's receipt of a deferred judgment did not act as an immediate waiver of his rights to postconviction and habeas corpus relief and, even if it had, he has cited no authority for the proposition that the district court was obligated to inform him of this consequence.  We therefore affirm the denial of his habeas corpus petition. 

  

No. 16-1404 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. PAGE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Jeffrey L. Harris, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Mullins, J., and Goodhue, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Mark Page appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress.  Page claims the district court should have granted his motion because he only admitted to using marijuana after being subjected to custodial interrogation without first receiving a Miranda warning.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Page was not in custody when he made incriminating statements to Trooper Smith, the Miranda requirements had not been triggered, and the district court properly denied Page's motion to suppress.  We affirm.  

  

No. 16-1487 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. DOIEL 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, James S. Heckerman, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (6 pages)  

  

            The defendant appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and motion for new trial after a jury convicted him of one count of burglary in the second degree and one count of burglary in the third degree.  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict.  Additionally, the weight of the evidence is not contrary to the guilty verdicts.  

  

No. 16-1553 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. FABER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Kim M. Riley, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Jonathon Faber appeals the district court's denial of his challenge to the timeliness of the State's filing of the trial information.  He argues he was arrested in October 2015, when a police officer advised of his intention to arrest him and the April 2016 filing of the trial information was therefore untimely or, in the alternative, the filing of the trial information was more than forty-five days after his formal arrest in March 2016, and the application of the filing extension under Iowa Code section 4.1(34) (2015) violates his due process rights.  OPINION HOLDS: As was recently stated in State v. Williams, 895 N.W.2d 856, 867 (Iowa 2017), the speedy indictment "rule is triggered from the time a person is taken into custody, but only when the arrest is completed by taking the person before a magistrate for an initial appearance."  Section 4.1(34) provides that if the forty-fifth day deadline under Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(2)(a) is a Sunday, a trial information filed on the following Monday is timely.  That timing does not violate due process rights.  We therefore conclude the State's filing of the trial information was timely and affirm the denial of Faber's motion to dismiss. 

  

No. 16-1561 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

JONES v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, George L. Stigler, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (6 pages)  

  

            Michael Jones appeals the district court decision dismissing his petition for postconviction relief on the ground it was untimely.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Jones did not preserve error on his claim the clerk of court exceeded the clerk's duties and find his application for postconviction relief is untimely.  We find Jones is not entitled to relief on his pro se issues.  We affirm the decision of the district court. 

  

No. 16-1639 

 

AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS ON CROSS APPEAL. 

   

BRADSHAW v. CEDAR RAPIDS AIRPORT COMMISSION 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  Partial Dissent by Mullins, P.J.  (16 pages)  

  

            Plaintiff former employee sued former employer for severance pay allegedly owed pursuant to an employment agreement.  On cross motions for summary judgment, the district court held the employee was not entitled to severance pay pursuant to the agreement but was entitled to additional compensation.  OPINION HOLDS: The employee voluntarily resigned his employment and was not entitled to severance pay pursuant to the employment agreement.  The employee was not entitled to additional compensation.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent from the part of the opinion that reverses the district court's order compensating Bradshaw to November 3, 2014.  Bradshaw complied with the terms of the contract, which gave him the right to select a voluntarily resignation date of no less than thirty days.  I would find Bradshaw is entitled to compensation through his announced effective resignation date and would deny the Commission's cross appeal and affirm the district court.  

  

No. 16-1661 

 

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

 

HERING v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            David Hering appeals an order denying his motion for "protection and preservation" of the court records and legal documents kept in his prison cell.  OPINION HOLDS: Because this action no longer presents a justiciable controversy and no exceptions to the mootness doctrine apply, we dismiss Hering's appeal. 

  

No. 16-1663 

 

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF HUINKER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clayton County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (11 pages)  

  

            Dody Huinker appeals the physical care, child support, spousal support, property division, and trial attorney fee provisions of the parties' dissolution decree.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on the issues of physical care, child support, property division, and trial attorney fees.  We modify the allocation of unpaid medical expenses and order Kevin Huinker to pay 78.88% and Dody to pay 21.12% of all unreimbursed medical expenses.  We also modify the decree to order Kevin to pay spousal support of $350 per month.  We award Dody $1000 appellate attorney fees, payable by Kevin. 

  

No. 16-1679 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

ESTATE OF STOUTENBERG v. UNITED ANESTHESIA & PAIN CONTROL, P.C. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Douglas F. Staskal, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            The Estate of Brandy Stoutenberg, and others, appeal the district court's denial of a motion to amend and the district court's denial of a continuance.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to amend and in refusing to grant a continuance. 

  

No. 16-1721 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. DERRICKSON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Nancy S. Tabor, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (3 pages)  

  

            Steven Derrickson appeals the sentence entered upon his guilty plea to third-degree burglary.  He argues the district court abused its discretion by improperly punishing him for being drug addicted.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion and affirm Derrickson's sentence for third-degree burglary. 

  

No. 16-1740 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

MELTON v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert J. Blink, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., McDonald, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (7 pages)  

  

            A defendant appeals the application a special sentence of supervision imposed pursuant to Iowa Code section 903B.2 (2011).  He argues the special sentence should commence at the end of the term of incarceration for the underlying sexual offense only and not at the conclusion of consecutive sentences for multiple convictions, some of which included offenses not implicating the special sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: A consecutive sentence is served as one continuous term.  The special sentence commences at the end of the entire consecutive term of imprisonment.  

  

No. 16-1746 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

DEWIT v. MADISON COUNTY ZONING BOARD 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Gregory A. Hulse, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (8 pages)  

  

            Neil and Melissa DeWit appeal from an order dismissing without prejudice their petition due to the failure to timely serve original notice.  OPINION HOLDS: The plaintiffs failed to timely serve original notice and did not establish good cause for failing to do so.  

  

No. 16-1776 

 

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR DISMISSAL. 

 

STATE v. AKERS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Nancy S. Tabor and Mark D. Cleve, Judges.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Michael Akers appeals from his conviction, following a bench trial, of possession of a firearm as a felon.  He argues (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the charge and (2) the district court should have granted his motion to suppress evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the record lacks substantial evidence to support the "felon" element of the crime.  We therefore reverse and remand for dismissal and do not consider the suppression issue. 

  

No. 16-1836 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF REYERSON 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Bower, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 pages)  

  

            David L. Reyerson appeals various provisions of the district court's decree dissolving his marriage to Sarah Smith Reyerson.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court equitably divided the parties' property and debt, properly calculated spousal and child support, and appropriately awarded attorney fees. 

    

  

No. 16-1900 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF HINDS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (8 pages)  

  

            John Hinds appeals the economic provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Markeen Hinds.  He claims the district court erred in awarding spousal support, certain property, and trial attorney fees to Markeen.  Markeen requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we affirm as equitable the district court's award of spousal support, property distribution, and award of trial attorney fees.  We award Markeen appellate attorney fees in the amount of $3500.00.  Costs are assessed to John. 

  

No. 16-1929 

 

REVERSED AND REMANDED. 

 

STATE v. TATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin A. Parker, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (6 pages)  

  

            Richard Tate appeals following the district court's denial of his application for a court-appointed investigator and an expert witness.  Tate claims the district court erred by denying his application without an ex parte hearing as provided under State v. Dahl, 874 N.W.2d 348, 353 (Iowa 2016).  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude that Dahl protocol was not followed during review of Tate's application, we reverse the district court's denial and remand for further proceedings consistent with the Dahl protocol. 

  

No. 16-1939 

 

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF PAVLOVEC 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (9 pages)  

  

            Amber Pavlovec appeals from the district court's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and decree dissolving her marriage to Andrew Pavlovec.  Amber challenges the child-custody and spousal-support provisions of the decree.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude joint physical care is in the best interests of the children and affirm.  We additionally conclude the spousal-support award is inequitable and modify the spousal-support provision accordingly. 

  

No. 16-1947 

 

AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF HAMMER AND HOLLAND 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, DeDra L. Schroeder, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (8 pages)  

  

            Christopher Holland (Chris) appeals the modification court's decision to deny modification of the dissolution of marriage decree.  On cross-appeal, Natalie Hammer requests we reverse the modification court's denial of attorney fees and further seeks appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the modification court appropriately considered the child support amount as set forth in the decree, and Chris failed to show a substantial change of circumstances, we affirm.  We also affirm the modification court's denial of attorney fees for Natalie, but we award her appellate attorney fees. 

  

No. 16-1974 

 

REVERSED AND REMANDED. 

 

NANCE v. IOWA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Beverly Gardiner Nance unsuccessfully sought judicial review from the Iowa Department of Revenue's denial of her request for a partial refund of an inheritance tax payment.  On appeal, she contends the distribution of a decedent's assets pursuant to a Family Settlement Agreement (FSA) should govern the imposition of inheritance taxes if the FSA was made in good faith and not for the purpose of avoiding taxes.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude the Department and the district court misapplied the law, we reverse and remand to the district court for remand to the Department for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

  

No. 16-1990 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. HOWARD 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (9 pages)  

  

            The defendant appeals his conviction of harassment in the first degree.  OPINION HOLDS: The record contains substantial evidence supporting the defendant's conviction, and trial counsel was not ineffective because the defendant cannot demonstrate prejudice.  

  

No. 16-2019 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. THORNBURG 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mary E. Howes, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (11 pages)  

  

            Dustin Thornburg appeals from his convictions following his guilty pleas to stalking and lascivious acts with a child, as an habitual offender.  Thornburg maintains neither his guilty pleas to stalking and lascivious acts with a child nor his admission to prior felonies were entered voluntarily and intelligently.  He also claims there was not a factual basis to support his guilty plea for stalking.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court substantially complied with its duty to inform Thornburg of his need to file a motion in arrest of judgment to challenge his guilty pleas and Thornburg failed to file the motion, we do not consider his claims of alleged errors involving the court's acceptance of his pleas.  Additionally, the procedure used by the district court in accepting Thornburg's admission of two previous felony convictions was not deficient.  Finally, we preserve for further development of the record Thornburg's claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to challenge whether his guilty plea to stalking was voluntarily and intelligently made.  We affirm.  

  

No. 16-2054 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. BRODERSEN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Christopher C. Foy, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)  

  

            The defendant appeals his conviction of third-degree sexual abuse following a jury trial, asserting the district court erred in allowing the sexual-assault nurse examiner to testify as to the victim's statements over the defendant's objection.  opinion holds: Because the hearsay testimony given by the victim's examining nurse was admissible under the medical diagnosis or treatment exception to the hearsay rule, and even if it was not, the admission of the hearsay evidence was not prejudicial, we affirm the defendant's conviction of third-degree sexual abuse. 

  

No. 16-2069 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. MARTIN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)  

  

           Trevor Martin appeals his conviction for knowingly possessing a firearm as a felon.  He argues his attorney was ineffective in not asking the district court to instruct the jury on the definition of "knowingly."  OPINION HOLDS: Given the holding in State v. Hoffer, 383 N.W.2d 543, 549 (Iowa 1986), we cannot find counsel breached a material duty by not asking for the uniform instruction defining "knowledge."  Accordingly, the absence of a definitional instruction did not violate Martin's right to due process, and Martin is not entitled to a new trial. 

  

No. 16-2090 

 

CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SETENCE VACATED, AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING. 

 

STATE v. SPIKER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John G. Linn and John M. Wright, Judges.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Nickalas Spiker appeals his conviction and sentence for lascivious acts with a child.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the record sufficient to vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge because of the consideration of improper factors in sentencing. 

  

No. 16-2120 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE THOMAS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Randy V. Hefner, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (9 pages)  

  

            Steven Thomas appeals from the economic provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Angela Thomas.  In response, Angela asks us to affirm the district court's decree and award her $2500 in appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court's inclusion of a $25,000 Social Security debt as a marital liability to be divided.  Additionally, the district court's division of marital property was equitable, and we will not disturb the ruling.  Because the record does not establish that Steven has the ability to pay them, we decline to award Angela appellate attorney fees.  We affirm.  

  

No. 16-2122 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. ARTERBURN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Lucy J. Gamon, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (9 pages)  

  

            A defendant challenges his guilty plea to second-degree murder.  He argues (1) the trial court failed to comply with the requirements for an adequate advisory and he thus is entitled to challenge his plea on direct appeal, (2) that the plea lacked a factual basis, and (3) that the plea was involuntary.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that the trial court's advisory substantially complied with applicable rules of criminal procedure and direct appeal is improper.  We find that a factual basis exists because a review of the minutes of testimony provides support for each element of the offense and defense counsel stipulated to the inference of malice.  We preserve his voluntariness claim for postconviction review.  

  

No. 16-2181 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. TRIMBLE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Casey D. Jones, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            The defendant appeals the sentence imposed after his guilty plea for driving while barred.  OPINION HOLDS: The sentencing court did not abuse its discretion.  

  

No. 16-2188 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF WASHBURN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Fae E. Hoover-Grinde, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Jamie Washburn appeals a temporary order modifying his child support obligation.  He asserts the district court failed to consider the most reliable evidence presented when determining his income for purposes of the order.  OPINION HOLDS: Considering the history of highly contested income disputes between these parties, the district court properly calculated support using income based on the findings of fact in the recent dissolution decree.  

  

No. 16-2201 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

BLUE v. STATE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, John J. Haney, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Bobby Blue appeals from the district court's denial of his application for postconviction relief.  Blue claims his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress inculpatory statements Blue made to the police.  Blue asserts he would not have entered into a plea agreement with the State and instead would have insisted on going to trial if counsel had alerted him that his incriminating statements may not have been admissible at that trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Blue has not met his burden to establish either that trial counsel breached an essential duty or that he would have insisted on going to trial.  We affirm.  

  

No. 16-2228 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. DAVIS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Marsha A. Bergan, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Anthony Davis appeals his conviction for assault on persons engaged in certain occupations causing bodily injury.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Davis has failed to show he received ineffective assistance on the ground defense counsel permitted him to plead guilty where there was not an adequate factual basis for the plea.  There is an adequate factual basis in the record, and we affirm Davis's conviction. 

  

No. 17-0011 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

ESTATE OF BAKER v. NEPPER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Edward A. Jacobson, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Danilson, C.J.  (7 pages)  

  

            Kathy Pope, Kristy Munden, and Dustin Pope appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Wayne Baker.  OPINION HOLDS: The intervenors failed to assert genuine issues of material facts, and therefore, the grant of summary judgment was proper.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Only a partial summary judgment should have been granted because a genuine issue of material fact existed as to the value of the building. 

  

No. 17-0019 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. SMITH 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Rustin T. Davenport and Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judges.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (3 pages)  

  

            Antoine Smith appeals from the sentence imposed upon his convictions for possession with intent to deliver marijuana; operating while intoxicated, first offense; and eluding or attempting to elude a pursuing law enforcement vehicle.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm. 

  

No. 17-0021 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. WALLACE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Kim M. Riley, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (3 pages)  

  

            Robert Wallace appeals his conviction and sentence to one count of possession of a controlled substance, second offense, in violation of Iowa Code sections 124.206 and 124.401(5) (2016).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the minutes of testimony provided a factual basis for the guilty plea, trial counsel did not breach an essential duty, and we affirm the conviction and sentence of the district court. 

  

No. 17-0031 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE M.F. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Bradley J. Harris, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (6 pages)  

  

            M.F. contends the district court wrongly determined he was seriously mentally impaired and required involuntary hospitalization.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find substantial evidence in the record to support the district court's finding that M.F. is a physical or emotional danger to himself or others, we affirm. 

  

No. 17-0083 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF LOGEMANN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, James M. Richardson, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            Kersten Abild (formerly known as Kersten Logemann) appeals from the district court's denial of her request to modify the child-support provision of the decree dissolving her marriage to Nathan Logemann.  Nathan asks that we affirm the district court's ruling and award him $5000 in appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Kersten failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish a substantial change warranting modification occurred, so we affirm the district court's denial of her request to modify.  We decline to award Nathan appellate attorney fees.  

  

No. 17-0084 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. FRANZEN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            After accepting Scott Franzen's pleas of guilty to two counts of sexual abuse against a fourteen-year-old girl, the district court imposed consecutive sentences—for a total prison term not to exceed twenty years.  Franzen appeals, contending the district court abused its sentencing discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record reveals nothing unreasonable about the chosen sentence, we affirm.  

  

No. 17-0099 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

DELGADO-ZUNIGA v. DICKEY & CAMPBELL LAW FIRM 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Douglas F. Staskal, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Jose Cruz Delgado-Zuniga appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of attorney Michael Piper and his employer, Dickey & Campbell Law Firm (collectively Defendants), asserting genuine issues of material fact exist such that summary judgment was improper.  opinion holds: Because we agree with the district court that the agency lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear Delgado's workers' compensation claim, Delgado's workers' compensation claim would have failed.  As a result, even assuming arguendo that Piper was negligent, Delgado sustained no damage by Piper's inaction, and his claim of legal malpractice fails as a matter of law.  Consequently, we find no error in the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants. 

  

No. 17-0108 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF KRUSE 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Carl J. Petersen, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Benjamin Kruse appeals the district court's order requiring him to pay a postsecondary education subsidy for his daughter, Tari.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Tari did not repudiate her father and affirm the district court's order requiring the payment of a postsecondary education subsidy. 

    

  

No. 17-0217 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

REXROAT v. TROXEL 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, David A. Lester, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (4 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals from the decree establishing paternity, custody, support, and visitation.  She asserts the district court abused its discretion in admitting the custody evaluator's report and background information, the criminal histories of herself and her paramour, and certain exhibits on rebuttal.  She also contends the court erred in placing the child in the father's physical care, in not ordering more extensive visitation to her, and in refusing to order him to pay one-half of her trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We have thoroughly reviewed the record and the district court's thoughtful and detailed ruling.  For the reasons stated, and giving deference to the district court's credibility assessments, which are explained and supported by its findings—even disregarding findings supported by the objectionable exhibits, we find no reason to disturb the district court's decree granting physical care to the father. 

   

  

No. 17-0225 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. HILLMAN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, Rustin T. Davenport, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (3 pages)  

  

            Joshua Hillman appeals his conviction entered upon his guilty plea to fourth-degree criminal mischief.  He contends his plea lacked a factual basis and, accordingly, his plea attorney was ineffective in allowing him to enter the plea and waive his right to file a motion in arrest of judgment.  He also contends counsel was ineffective in failing to file or investigate an alibi defense and in failing to inform the district court that his guilty plea was the product of duress.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude Hillman's plea attorney did not breach an essential duty in allowing Hillman to plead guilty to the crime and in allowing him to waive his right to challenge the plea via a motion in arrest of judgment.  We also conclude the record is inadequate to resolve Hillman's other ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and preserve those claims for postconviction relief.  We therefore affirm Hillman's conviction. 

  

No. 17-0239 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. FRANCK 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Casey D. Jones, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (8 pages)  

  

            Melissa Franck appeals her sentence following her guilty plea to false reports and harassment, claiming her trial counsel was ineffective and the district court abused its discretion.  opinion holds: Upon our review, her ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims fail for lack of proving the requisite prejudice.  We also find no abuse of discretion by the sentencing court.  Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and sentence entered by the district court. 

  

No. 17-0261 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. KIGER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (3 pages)  

  

            Shawn Kiger appeals from his conviction, following a guilty plea, for assault causing serious injury.  Kiger maintains his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance.  More specifically, Kiger claims counsel was ineffective for failing to ensure Kiger understood the term "serious injury," which made his admission of guilt unknowing and involuntary.  OPINION HOLDS: We preserve Kiger's claim for further development of the record.  We affirm.  

  

No. 17-0266 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

VALDE v. EMPLOYMENT APPEAL BOARD 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Mitchell E. Turner, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (6 pages)  

  

            Michael Valde appeals from the district court's denial of his request for relief on judicial review, asserting his constitutionally protected contractual and property rights in his Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System benefits were violated.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude settled Iowa law determines a public pensioner has no vested contractual or property rights in his public pension benefits. 

  

No. 17-0280 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

BENSON v. EMPLOYMENT APPEAL BOARD 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (2 pages)  

  

            Timothy Benson appeals from an adverse ruling on his petition for judicial review of a final agency.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm without opinion pursuant to Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.1203, subsections (a), (c), and (d). 

  

No. 17-0306 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

MYERS v. R.R. DONNELLY & SONS CO. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karen A. Romano, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (8 pages)  

  

            David Myers appeals the district court's decision affirming the ruling of the workers' compensation commissioner finding his request for benefits was untimely.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is substantial evidence in the record to support the commissioner's determination Myers did not file a petition with the commissioner within two years after the discovery date of his cumulative back injury.  We affirm the decision of the district court and the commissioner. 

  

No. 17-0327 

 

REVERSED AND REMANDED. 

 

IN RE MARRIAGE OF TINKER 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea Dryer, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            A husband appeals from the district court's entry of a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO).  OPINION HOLDS: The parties' divorce decree does not limit or constrain the husband's ability to elect his IPERS benefit.  The QDRO in this case, which did limit or constrain his ability, was an impermissible modification of the property division or an impermissible serial final judgment.  We therefore reverse and remand for approval of a QDRO implementing the express terms of the divorce decree.  

  

No. 17-0333 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. BOYD 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Carol L. Coppola and Odell G. McGhee II, District Associate Judges.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (6 pages)  

  

            Adam Boyd appeals the conviction and sentence entered upon his guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance (first offense).  He contends (1) the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him and (2) his plea attorney was ineffective in failing to seek the suppression of certain evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Boyd and he cannot establish that his attorney breached an essential duty in failing to move for suppression of certain evidence.  We therefore affirm Boyd's conviction and sentence. 

  

No. 17-0348 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

HENSCH v. MYSAK 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Douglas F. Staskal, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (9 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals an order granting the parties joint physical care of their child.  OPINION HOLDS: On de novo review, we conclude joint physical care is in the child's best interest.  

  

No. 17-0385 

 

REVERSED. 

 

IN RE D.H. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Monty W. Franklin, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (9 pages)  

  

            An interstate juvenile runaway appeals the juvenile court's order placing the juvenile in secure detention pursuant to the Interstate Compact for Juveniles.  OPINION HOLDS: The exception to the mootness doctrine applies, and the juvenile court failed to exercise its discretion when it placed D.H. in secure detention.  

  

No. 17-0425 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. DOLAN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            James Dolan appeals his jail sentence for domestic-abuse assault while displaying a dangerous weapon.  The district court imposed a one-year term, suspending all but 180 days.  Dolan asserts the court relied on improper factors and abused its discretion in deciding on the sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record contradicts Dolan's assertions, we affirm his sentence. 

  

No. 17-0530 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. CROOKS 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey L. Poulson, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (3 pages)  

  

            Shadron Crooks appeals the sentence imposed upon his conviction of possession of a controlled substance (third offense) as a habitual offender.  He argues the sentence imposed constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article I, section 17 of the Iowa Constitution.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on the reasoning of our prior rulings, we affirm Crooks's sentence. 

  

No. 17-0595 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

STATE v. HARDIN 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (6 pages)  

  

            A defendant challenges his sentence for murder in the first degree.  He claims he is entitled to a new sentencing hearing because his waiver of the right to counsel was not knowing and voluntary.  He also raises several pro se claims.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the case and the district court's waiver colloquy, we conclude the waiver was knowing and voluntary.  The pro se claims are time-barred and without merit.  

  

No. 17-0773 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE B.T. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Romonda D. Belcher, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2016).  She argues the State did not prove the child could not be returned to her on the date of the termination hearing and termination is not in the best interest of the child.  OPINION HOLDS: The two-year-old child had ongoing serious medical issues and needs special assistance with eating.  The mother had not obtained mental-health therapy, had not received any help to learn to avoid domestic violence, had not received training on feeding the child, and was not up to date on the child's medical needs.  The child could not be returned to the mother at the time of the hearing.  The child is bonded and doing well in the pre-adoptive home, and her long-term best interest requires termination.  We affirm the order terminating the mother's parental rights. 

  

No. 17-0862 

 

AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. 

 

IN RE J.D. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Julie A. Schumacher, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (10 pages)  

  

            Parents appeal the termination of their parental rights.  opinion holds: Because we agree with the juvenile court's finding that the State proved the statutory grounds for termination found in Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2017) and termination of parental rights is in the children's best interests, we affirm the juvenile court's ruling terminating the parents' parental rights. 

  

No. 17-0874 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE G.D. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Amy L. Zacharias, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (8 pages)  

  

            The guardian ad litem (GAL) and the custodian appeal from the juvenile court's dispositional order, in which the court denied the GAL's motion to waive the State's obligation to make reasonable efforts to reunify the children with their parents.  The GAL maintains there was substantial evidence of aggravated circumstances allowing the court to waive reasonable efforts for reunification.  Additionally, if reasonable efforts are not to be waived, the GAL argues the department should not be required to allow visits between the children and the parents as parts of its reasonable-efforts mandate in this case.  OPINION HOLDS: There is not clear and convincing evidence the receipt of services would not be likely to correct the conditions that led to the children's removal within a reasonable period of time.  Additionally, nothing in the record supports the claim that ongoing visits between the children and the parents are detrimental to the children and should be stopped.  We affirm the juvenile court's dispositional order.  

  

No. 17-0883 

 

AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. 

 

IN RE E.T. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph W. Seidlin, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (6 pages)  

  

            A father and mother appeal separately from the order terminating their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find sufficient evidence to support the termination of both the mother's and father's rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (h) (2017).  We also find no exceptions to termination apply and termination is in the best interests of the children. 

  

No. 17-0917 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE A.W. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (14 pages)  

  

            The mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to her child, A.W. pursuant to Iowa Code Section 232.116(1)(h) and (g) (2017).  The mother claims: (1) the State failed to prove the statutory factors; (2) the court erred in denying a six-month permanency extension; (3) termination is not in the best interests of A.W.; (4) the mother's bond with the child precludes termination; (5) the juvenile court erred in denying the mother's motion to continue; and (6) the juvenile court erred in denying the mother's request to appoint new counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination of the mother's parental rights to A.W. under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) is supported by clear and convincing evidence and is in the child's best interest because A.W. could not be returned to the mother's home at the time of termination.  The conditions that led to removal would not be resolved if the juvenile court granted a six-month permanency extension.  Termination is also in A.W.'s best interests because the child was exposed to domestic abuse and methamphetamine while in the mother's care.  Termination is not precluded by the permissive factors.  The court did not err denying the mother's motion to continue and motion to appoint new counsel.  

  

No. 17-0933 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE B.C. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M. Dreismeier, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the mother's parental rights.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court. 

  

No. 17-0946 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE J.L. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph W. Seidlin, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (4 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find it would not be in the child's best interests to give the mother additional time to work toward reunification with the child.  We affirm the juvenile court's decision terminating the mother's parental rights. 

  

No. 17-0961 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE P.G. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph W. Seidlin, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in 2016.  She does not challenge the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, but she contends "[t]he Juvenile Court erred in terminating [her] parental rights when [she] had lower mental functioning necessitating additional time to benefit from services and the child was in the custody of her relative."  OPINION HOLDS: Based on this record, we conclude the juvenile court acted appropriately in declining to grant the mother additional time to reunify with the child, and we further conclude the juvenile court acted appropriately in declining to invoke the "relative" exception to termination.  We affirm the termination of the mother's parental rights to her fourth child. 

  

No. 17-0968 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE M.L. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Nancy S. Tabor, Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (6 pages)  

  

            The biological father appeals the termination of his parental rights, asserting a lack of clear and convincing evidence to support the termination and also that termination is not in the child's best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: As the father leaves unchallenged specific statutory grounds for terminating his parental rights, he has waived his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the unchallenged grounds.  In addition, we conclude termination is in the child's best interests and no impediments to termination exist.  We therefore affirm the termination of the father's parental rights. 

  

No. 17-0970 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE A.L. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (7 pages)  

  

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental relationship with four children.  She challenges the court's order both on the statutory grounds for termination and on the best-interests determination.  She asks for additional time for reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: After examining the record and the law, we defer to the juvenile court's credibility findings and reach the same conclusions regarding the welfare of the children. 

  

No. 17-1004 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE Z.R. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M. Dreismeier, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (13 pages)  

  

            The mother appeals from an order terminating her parental rights.  She argues the State failed to prove a statutory ground for termination, termination is not in the child's best interest, and the State failed to make reasonable efforts towards reunification.  She also asserts she should be given additional time to work towards reunification and that the court should exercise discretionary power pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(3) to preserve the parent-child bond.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved a ground for termination, proved that termination is in the child's best interest, and made reasonable efforts at reunification.  There is no evidence to support granting additional time for reunification or exercising discretion in favor of the mother.  

  

No. 17-1007 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE Z.E. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (3 pages)  

  

            The State filed a child-in-need-of-assistance (CINA) petition for each of seven children who live in the same household.  The district court adjudicated one child CINA and dismissed the remaining six petitions.  The State argues the confirmed injury to the one child, together with a history of prior assessments and concerns with the children and parental supervision, require findings of CINA as to all petitions.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find the State did not prove by clear and convincing evidence the remaining six children were CINA pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(b) and (c)(2) (2016), as alleged by the State.  We therefore affirm. 

  

No. 17-1028 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE J.S. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, Adria Kester, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (3 pages)  

  

            The mother appeals from the dispositional order entered in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: Because error was not preserved, we affirm.  

  

No. 17-1036 

 

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. 

 

IN RE R.T. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Julie A. Schumacher, Judge.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Tabor and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (8 pages)  

  

            An incarcerated father appeals the termination of his parental relationship with his four-year-old son, R.T.  He argues the State failed to offer clear and convincing proof of the elements under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(i) (2017).  OPINION HOLDS: After an independent review of the record, we agree the State did not meet its burden of proof.  Accordingly, we reverse the termination order and remand for further proceedings. 

  

No. 17-1046 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE J.A. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Peter B. Newell, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)  

  

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  He contends (1) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court, (2) the State failed to make reasonable efforts for reunification, and (3) termination was not in the child's best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we conclude the State proved the statutory ground for termination set forth in Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2017), the department minimally complied with its statutory reasonable-efforts mandate, and termination was in the child's best interests.  We therefore affirm. 

  

No. 17-1081 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE B.B. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, J.  (7 pages)  

  

            The mother appeals from the termination of her parental rights to her child, B.B.  She maintains there is not clear and convincing evidence to establish the statutory grounds for termination, termination is not in B.B.'s best interests, and a permissive factor weighs against termination.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm the termination of the mother's parental rights.  

  

No. 17-1105 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE W.G. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, P.J.  (7 pages)  

  

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  His primary assertion on appeal is that he should be given an additional six months to progress to reunification with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father has been incarcerated for most of the time since the child was removed from the home, he has made little progress in advancing towards reunification, and the earliest he could be paroled would be in April 2018, we affirm the termination of the father's parental rights. 

  

No. 17-1112 

 

AFFIRMED. 

 

IN RE D.W. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, DeDra L. Schroeder, Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 pages)  

  

            A father appeals the juvenile court decision terminating his parental rights to three children.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State offered the father reasonable efforts, there was sufficient evidence to terminate the father's rights, no exception to termination is proper, and termination is in the best interests of the children. 

  

No. 17-1124 

 

AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. 

 

IN RE M.M. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (5 pages)  

  

            Parents appeal the termination of their parental rights.  opinion holds: Upon our de novo review of the record, we find the juvenile court considered all issues now presented on appeal, and this court approves of the court's reasons and conclusions contained in the order terminating the parents' parental rights.  Accordingly, we affirm the juvenile court's order terminating the parents' parental rights. 

  

  

Follow us on Twitter - @IowaCourts return to top