2018 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (3 pages)

            Jose Pena appeals the sentence imposed upon his conviction of child endangerment resulting in bodily injury, contending the district court improperly relied on unproven and unadmitted facts in sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the unchallenged portions of the presentence-investigation report, which were permissible considerations, are sufficient to establish the matter Pena complains the court relied on in denying his sentencing requests.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Amy L. Zacharias, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Clear and convincing evidence establishes the grounds for terminating both the mother’s and the father’s parental rights under section 232.116(1)(h) (2017).  II. The mother failed to preserve error on her reasonable-efforts claim.  III. Termination is in the child’s best interests. 

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Robert J. Dull, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  Dissent by Vogel, J.  (20 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: We find the State failed to prove the alleged statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence. We reverse the juvenile court’s termination order and remand for further proceedings.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I would affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.  I believe the State proved by clear and convincing evidence B.M. could not be returned to the care of the mother at the time of the termination hearing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.  aFFIRMED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State fulfilled its duty to make reasonable efforts to reunify the mother with her children under Iowa Code section 232.102(6)(b) (2018), and clear and convincing evidence establishes the grounds for terminating the mother’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h).  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, William S. Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find additional time to have the child placed in the father’s care is not warranted and termination is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Steven W. Guiter, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State proved by clear and convincing evidence the children could not be returned at the time of the termination hearing, no permissive factor weighs against termination, and termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Angela L. Doyle, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Danilson, C.J.  (7 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  The juvenile court terminated the father’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b), (e), (h), and (l) (2018).  It also found termination was in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we find clear and convincing evidence supports termination under section 232.116(1)(h), termination is in the child’s best interests, and there is no basis to support an extension.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M. Dreismeier, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights to a child, born in 2016.  The mother contends (A) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court, (B) the termination hearing should have been postponed, and (C) the district court should have declined to terminate her parental rights based on the closeness of the parent-child bond.  The father contends (A) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court and (B) termination was not in the child’s best interests given the closeness of the parent-child bond.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the parents’ rights to the child.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Charles D. Fagan, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J. (4 pages)

           A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights in her child.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court’s decision was supported by sufficient evidence, the State made reasonable efforts to reunify the mother with her child, and the termination of rights is in the child’s best interest.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Paul L. Macek, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Mullins, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, J.  (2 pages)

           Charity Rush appeals the district court’s decree foreclosing the mortgages on the property in question.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court properly rendered a judgment of foreclosure.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Mary E. Chicchelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  Dissent by Potterfield, J. (29 pages)

           Dustin Jefferson appeals his conviction of aiding and abetting first-degree murder in violation of Iowa Code sections 707.2 (2013).  He argues there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction and his trial counsel was ineffective in a number of respects.  OPINION HOLDS: We find sufficient evidence supports Dustin’s conviction and trial counsel was not ineffective as alleged.  We affirm Dustin’s conviction of aiding and abetting murder in the first degree.  DISSENT ASSERTS:  The evidence here is insufficient to support the verdict.  I would reverse and remand for dismissal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Carla T. Schemmel, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Amy Berg appeals the economic provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Mark Berg.  She contends (1) the district court should have assigned her one of the two tax exemptions for the children; (2) the district court’s property division was inequitable, and (3) she should have been awarded more trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dissolution decree as modified.  We order Mark to pay $2000 toward Amy’s appellate attorney-fee obligation.