April 2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, C.J., Vaitheswaran, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (4 pages)

            Shannon Turner pled guilty to operating while intoxicated and assault with intent to commit sexual abuse.  He appeals his sentence, arguing the district court abused its discretion and failed to consider all relevant factors and possible sentencing options when sentencing him.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on the record and the district court’s reasoning when sentencing Turner, we find the district court did not abuse its discretion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to several children.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the parents’ rights to their children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence shows that the child could not be returned to the mother’s care at the time of the termination hearing, establishing the grounds for terminating the mother’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2018).  Because the statutory time period has passed and there is no evidence the bond between the child and the mother is so great that terminating it would be detrimental to the child, termination is in the child’s best interests.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to one child.  She contends the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying her motion to continue when the court continued the first of two days of hearing for inclement weather and the mother failed to appear on the second day.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court did not abuse its discretion.  There was no communication from the mother as to her whereabouts, and the best interests of the child demanded permanency.  The mother had not made a significant effort to address the substance abuse issues that led to the initial removal.  Under those circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (12 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Phillip J. Tabor, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother failed to preserve error on her claims that the State failed to make reasonable efforts to have the children returned to her care and the juvenile court should have continued the termination hearing.  Because the evidence shows termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Patrick H. Tott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Potterfield, P.J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her five children.  The mother does not challenge the statutory grounds for termination.  She focuses on her argument on a permissive factor of Iowa Code section 232.116(3) (2018), claiming the court need not terminate her parental rights because each of the five children is in the custody of their respective father.  OPINION HOLDS: These children have been involved with the juvenile court system for much of their lives.  Leaving the door open for additional uncertainty in their lives is not in their best interests.  We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Potterfield, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (6 pages)

            Paul Cannon appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  He argues his PCR counsel was ineffective for failing to obtain an expert opinion on his competency and for failing to challenge the procedure used during the competency determination.  OPINION HOLDS: We find his PCR counsel did not commit structural error and the procedure during the competency determination complied with due process.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Doyle, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Mackinzie Standlee-Campbell appeals her conviction for domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury.  She asserts the district court violated her constitutional right to present a defense when it excluded evidence of the victim’s prior bad acts and her conviction is not supported by sufficient evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Standlee-Campbell did not preserve her argument about her right to present a defense for our review, and even if we were to consider the issue, she cannot show the probative value of the evidence substantially outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice.  Also, the evidence is sufficient for the jury to reject her self-defense claim and find she committed domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Paul G. Crawford, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (10 pages)

            Clay Thomas Paulson appeals from a jury trial finding him guilty as charged of suborning perjury and solicitation to suborn perjury.  He raises claims of insufficiency of the evidence and improper admission of hearsay.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude substantial evidence supported the elements of both crimes.  However, we conclude the woman’s statement as recounted by the police officer was offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted and, accordingly, was hearsay.  We conclude the State failed to prove the woman’s statement to the police officer concerning Paulson’s possession of a starred backpack was admissible under the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception to the hearsay rule.  Because the evidence was inadmissible, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Mary E. Chicchelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Bower, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (15 pages)

            Defendant appeals from his convictions for two counts of indecent contact with a child and three counts of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse.  He contends the jury verdicts are not supported by sufficient evidence and the district court erred in not granting him a new trial based on his weight-of-the-evidence and evidentiary claims.  Finally, he contends his trial counsel was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS:  We find Olson failed to preserve his sufficiency-of-the-evidence argument.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion for new trial as the verdict was not against the weight-of-the-evidence.  The court did not abuse its discretion in any preserved evidentiary ruling.  And the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims are preserved for postconviction-relief proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Christopher C. Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Daniel Connerley appeals his convictions for third-degree theft and ongoing criminal conduct, arguing the court erred in modifying the jury verdict form to remove an offense greater than the offense charged by the State after the jury returned a verdict finding Connerley guilty of the greater charge.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no error in the court’s modification of the verdict form, we affirm Connerley’s convictions.