January 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Mitchell E. Turner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (16 pages)

            The family of Max Morrison (the Morrisons) are plaintiffs in a negligence action against the Grundy County Rural Electric Cooperative (GCREC).  They alleged the GCREC was liable when an airplane carrying Max hit one of their above-ground power lines and crashed, resulting in Max’s death.  A jury found the GCREC was at fault but was not a cause of the crash.  The Morrisons raise numerous grounds of error.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the Morrisons received a favorable verdict finding fault, we do not entertain any allegations of error related to fault.  In addition, because the jury never reached the question of comparative fault, we do not consider any allegations of error related to comparative fault.  We find the Morrisons failed to preserve error on several issues, including on the instruction defining “cause.”  We address on its merits the Morrisons’ claim the court should have ruled as a matter of law that Max’s death fell within the scope of the GCREC’s liability; but we find the Morrisons were not entitled to a directed verdict on that question.  Having disposed of all issues, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (28 pages)

            James Hohenshell appeals a district court order denying his motion for a new trial and upholding a jury award in favor of plaintiffs.  He argues the district court erred in denying his motion for a new trial or remittitur because: (1) the verdict was influenced by passion or prejudice, (2) the compensatory damages award was not supported by the evidence, and (3) the punitive damages award was excessive and violates his due process rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of Hohenshell’s motion for a new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Michael J. Schilling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., Vaitheswaran, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Jacob Smith appeals his convictions for theft in the second degree and burglary in the third degree, both as a habitual offender.  OPINION HOLDS: Sufficient evidence identified Smith as the perpetrator, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica L. Wittig Zrinyi, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J. Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Tabor, P.J.  (12 pages)

            Duane Frick appeals the economic provisions of the district court’s decree dissolving his marriage with Jane Frick.  OPINION HOLDS: We find a discrepancy occurred in the court’s calculations and modify the economic distributions.  We affirm as modified the decree’s spousal support award and life insurance requirement.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent in part from the majority's modification of the property division.  Duane failed to preserve error on the issue of the district court's calculation error.  Although Duane asked the court in his motion to modify, enlarge, or amend, to reconsider the equalization payment, he did not allege an error in arithmetic as he does on appeal.  I would not disturb the equalization payment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey L. Poulson, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (11 pages)

            A jury found Tykel Robinson guilty of first-degree robbery.  Robinson appeals his conviction and sentence.  First, Robinson asserts he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his counsel failed to object to an incomplete jury instruction that did not provide for specific intent for an aider and abettor.  Second, he argues the district court should have excluded evidence of a shooting where Robinson was not involved.  Alternatively, he asserts his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the use of evidence beyond what the ruling in limine allowed.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude Robinson’s counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to object to the faulty instruction and such failure resulted in prejudice.  Additionally, we find the district court’s ruling on the motion in limine was proper, but we find the counsel breached an essential duty by failing to raise further objection to the admission of evidence beyond the confines of the ruling.  Therefore, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  CONVICTION CONDITIONALLY AFFIRMED; RULING ON MOTION VACATED; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., Tabor, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  Partial Dissent by Danilson, S.J.  (12 pages)

            Jamodd Sallis appeals his convictions and sentences following trial and jury verdict finding him guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon, being habitual offender, and carrying weapons.  He contends the trial court applied the wrong standard in ruling on his motion for a new trial.  He also contends there was insufficient evidence to prove he possessed a firearm.  Lastly, Sallis raises several issues related to the determination of his reasonable ability to pay restitution.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the jury verdicts on the sufficiency of the evidence.  But we reverse the district court’s judgment on the new-trial motion and its determination Sallis had the reasonable ability to pay restitution.  We remand for two actions: (1) a corrected sentencing order removing the reference to Sallis’s ability to pay and (2) application of the weight-of-the-evidence standard on Sallis’s motion for new trial.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I agree with the majority in all respects except the adequacy of the district court’s ruling on the motion for new trial.  I believe the district court applied the proper standard, and I would affirm the convictions but remand with directions to correct the sentencing order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (2 pages)

            Troy Shearon appeals the summary disposition of his postconviction-relief application.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court’s ruling granting the State’s request for summary disposition.  We therefore affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., Tabor, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            Julie Meyer appeals the district court ruling on her petition to modify the postsecondary-education provision in the 2010 decree dissolving her marriage to William Gaynor.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Julie was not provided a hearing, and the district court answered questions not properly before it, we reverse the district court’s order and remand for a new trial on Julie’s petition for modification of the decree on the issue of postsecondary-education subsidies.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED IN PART AND AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED IN PART ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (15 pages)

            Edward Lynch appeals, and Rebecca Lynch cross-appeals, a decree of dissolution of marriage.  Edward challenges the award of traditional spousal support in favor of Rebecca.  Rebecca challenges the awards of spousal support and trial attorney fees as inadequate and contends the district court erred in setting aside the entirety of the premarital value of Edward’s retirement account.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court but modify the decree in two respects.  We modify the district court’s property distribution to award Rebecca an equalization payment in the amount of $7500 to be paid by Edward.  We modify the spousal support award in favor of Rebecca to $1000 per month.  We affirm the district court’s award of trial attorney fees.  Costs on appeal are assessed equally between the parties.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Paul B. Ahlers, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (5 pages)

            Travis Hanna appeals his conviction, following a guilty plea, of operating while intoxicated.  He argues: (1) the State breached the plea agreement with its sentencing recommendation; (2) defense counsel was ineffective in joining the State’s recommendation; and (3) the court failed to inform him in advance that it refused to be bound by the agreement and failed to tell him he had a right to withdraw his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the record inadequate to determine whether the State breached the plea agreement or counsel was ineffective as alleged.  We reject Hanna’s remaining argument.  We therefore affirm Hanna’s conviction but preserve his claims concerning ineffective assistance of counsel for possible postconviction-relief proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Mahan, S.J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Joel Zamora appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief following his 2014 convictions for burglary in the first degree and robbery in the first degree, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the court’s order denying Zamora’s application for postconviction relief. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Mark J. Eveloff, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (3 pages)

            Bobby Ray Devers, appeals the district court’s summary dismissal of his fourth postconviction-relief (PCR) action.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the PCR court that neither claim Devers now makes would be newly-discovered evidence.  Therefore, the PCR court’s grant of summary dismissal is affirmed by memorandum opinion pursuant to Iowa Court Rule 21.26(1)(b), (d), and (e).