2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cherokee County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J. (11 pages)

            Eddie DeLong appeals from judgment and sentence entered upon his convictions for sexual abuse in the third degree as a habitual offender and supplying alcohol to a minor.  He asserts the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion to present testimony about the minor complainant’s prior sex life pursuant to Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.412.  He also challenges the habitual-offender colloquy and the fine imposed upon his conviction as a habitual offender.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the court’s rape-shield ruling.  Accordingly, we affirm DeLong’s convictions.  But we reverse the habitual-offender judgment and remand for further proceedings because DeLong’s stipulation of prior offenses fell short of the requirements in State v. Harrington, 893 N.W.2d 36, 45–46 (Iowa 2017).  We need not reach the issue concerning the concededly erroneous fine as resentencing will be required. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mitchell County, Colleen D. Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., Vaitheswaran, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (5 pages)

            Robert Walters and Sandi Heter, the objectors, appeal the district court’s ruling on their objection to the final report.  They argue the district court incorrectly determined co-executors, Richard Walters and Shirley Shirley, had not breached their fiduciary duties.  The co-executors argue the district court’s ruling was proper because the objectors have failed to meet their burden of proof.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we defer to the district court’s credibility findings and find no credible evidence warranting a disruption of the district court’s ruling.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lucas County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (2 pages)

            Robin Keith appeals following pleas of guilty to a number of charges, contending trial counsel was ineffective and the court erred in accepting his plea.  He asserts the “strong and unfamiliar psychological medication” he was taking interfered with his cognitive abilities and prevented him from understanding his rights and the consequences of entering a guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: The record before us is not adequate to explore this ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim and we preserve the claim for possible postconviction-relief proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., Vaitheswaran, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J. (11 pages)

            Miguel Angel Lorenzo Baltazar appeals his conviction for murder in the first degree.  He argues his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to jury instructions on his justification defense, and both parties argue the court abused its discretion in allowing only certain character evidence of the decedent.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the 2017 amendments to Chapter 704 of the Iowa Code should have resulted in the jury being instructed without the “alternative course of action” language, we find counsel breached an essential duty in failing to object when the older version of the justification instruction was given, and prejudice resulted.  The evidence presented at trial was sufficient to prove Lorenzo Baltazar acted with the specific intent to kill, and thus we reverse and remand for new trial.  Further, should the issue of the character evidence arise during the new trial, we also find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing only certain character evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Grundy County, George L. Stigler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Tabor, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (14 pages)

            The mother appeals the district court award of shared physical care with the father of their one-and-a-half year old son, who, because of a significant hearing deficiency has bilateral cochlear implants.  She contends that (1) the trial court failed to comply with Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(1) in not filing written findings; (2) the court should adopt a “special needs best interests” standard for determining physical care of a special-needs child, and (3) shared care with the father is not in the son’s best interest.  Father requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon de novo review, we find (1) mother failed to preserve error on the written findings issue, but we still conduct a de novo review; (2) we must decline mother’s invitation to adopt a new legal standard as it applies to special-needs children and find the standards in current law provide adequate consideration of special needs of the child; (3) shared physical care of the child is in his best interest; and (4) we decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Nancy S. Tabor, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (5 pages)

            Darin Godfrey appeals the summary dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Godfrey seeks to challenge his requirement to register for the sex offender registry, which has not yet been formally determined by the Iowa Department of Public Safety, the issue is not ripe for review, and summary dismissal was appropriate.  In addition, Godfrey’s second claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is without merit. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Mullins, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A grandmother appeals the dismissal of her petitions for guardianship of her two grandchildren, arguing the establishment of guardianships is in the children’s best interests.  She also requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: The grandmother did not rebut the statutory preference for parents to retain care and control of their children.  It is in the children’s best interests to deny the guardianships and permit the father to retain care and control of the children.  We decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M. Dreismeier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (3 pages)

            Gregory Kuchera appeals his conviction for carrying a concealed weapon.  He alleges his trial counsel in guilty plea proceedings was ineffective in failing to request withdrawal of his guilty plea when his statements showed he was confused and potentially incompetent.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record is inadequate on direct appeal, we preserve the claims for postconviction-relief proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Heather L. Lauber, District Associate Judge.  SENTENCES AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., Bower, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J. (5 pages)

            Thomas Rawls Jr. appeals the sentences imposed on his convictions of five criminal counts.  He argues the district court abused its discretion in ordering the prison sentences on all counts to be served consecutively and erred in ordering him to reimburse the State for court-appointed attorney fees as restitution without first properly determining his reasonable ability to pay the same.  OPINION HOLDS:  We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s imposition of consecutive sentences.  We conclude the court erred in determining Rawls possessed the reasonable ability to pay court-appointed attorney fees as restitution because the amount for the same was not before the court.  We vacate the portions of the district court’s sentencing order concerning restitution and remand the case to the district court to order restitution consistent with the supreme court’s ruling in State v. Albright, ___ N.W.2d ___, 2019 WL 1302384 (Iowa 2019). 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Mary E. Chicchelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (10 pages)

            Former spouses appeal and cross-appeal the district court’s reduction of the husband’s alimony payments.  Both also request appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: The former wife’s move to full-time employment and the tripling of her salary constitutes a substantial change in circumstances, and considering other relevant factors, we affirm the district court’s decision to reduce the alimony obligation.  We award the former wife appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Mary E. Howes, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Vogel, C.J., and Doyle and Tabor, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (14 pages)

            Maxwell Alberhasky (Max) appeals the district court’s dismissal of Max’s claim his father, George Rodney Alberhasky (Rod), breached his fiduciary duty in managing assets left to him by his grandmother.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude Max’s petition satisfied our liberal notice-pleading standards, we reverse the district court’s grant of Rod’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Chad A. Kepros, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (7 pages)

Teresa Sladek appeals the denial of her application for unemployment benefits, challenging the Employment Appeal Board’s determination that she voluntarily quit her employment with temporary services employer Kelly Services USA, LLC without good cause attributable to the employer.  OPINION HOLDS: Like the district court, we affirm the decision of the Employment Appeal Board.