2019 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vogel, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (4 pages)

            The mother appeals the district court’s ruling denying her motion for a continuance and the district court’s order closing the child-in-need-of-assistance case.  First, the mother argues the district court should have granted her motion to continue.  Second, the mother asserts the district court was required to make a best-interests-of-the-children determination prior to closing the case, and had it made such determination, it would have found closing the case was improper.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm by memorandum opinion pursuant to Iowa Court Rule 21.26(1)(e). 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Humboldt County, Angela L. Doyle, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the termination of the mother’s parental rights is supported by clear and convincing evidence, no exception to termination should be applied, it would not be in the child’s best interests to give the mother additional time, and the State did not fail to engage in reasonable efforts.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Barbara H. Liesveld, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ.  Opinion by McDonald, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights in his child.  OPINION HOLDS: There is sufficient evidence supporting the statutory grounds authorizing the termination of his parental rights.  Termination of his parental rights is in the child’s best interest.  The parent-child bond does not preclude termination.  The father should not be granted an additional six months to work toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mary Jane Sokolovske, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because returning the child to the mother’s care would place the child at risk of an adjudicatory harm, the grounds for termination pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2017) have been proved by clear and convincing evidence.  We decline to grant the mother an additional six months to have the child returned to her care.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Chris Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Mullins, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (6 pages)

            The defendant agreed to pay restitution at the rate of fifty dollars a month after pleading guilty to theft in the first degree.  But two years later, facing serious health issues, he petitioned the district court to find he did not have the ability to pay the remaining balance.  The court found it had no authority to grant such relief.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court decision is correct.  Despite the change in the defendant’s circumstances, the court is without authority to grant him the relief he seeks—eliminating his entire obligation to pay restitution including victim restitution, court costs, and attorney fees.  The defendant did not unbundle the courts costs and attorney fees from the victim restitution, and it was not an abuse of discretion for the court to deny the general request to eliminate restitution altogether. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, John D. Ackerman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Bower, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Jeremy Saul appeals the summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the summary disposition of Saul’s application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Mary Pat Gunderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Mullins, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Matthew Leonard appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  He asserts he did not understand the consequences of his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: We give weight to the postconviction court’s finding that Leonard lacked credibility, and his recorded colloquies with the district court prior to entering his plea show the court informed him of—and he acknowledged understanding—the consequences of pleading guilty.  Therefore, he has not shown ineffective assistance of counsel.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William Patrick Kelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, P.J., McDonald, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Gene Cook Jr. appeals from the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief.  He argues his sentence is cruel and unusual due to gross disproportionality and his age, and he asserts his other claims are not time-barred under recent precedent.  OPINION HOLDS: We find his sentence is constitutional and his other claims are time-barred even considering recent precedent.  Therefore, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Mark F. Schlenker, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (7 pages)

            Ciera Bolden appeals her conviction for one count of second-degree harassment.  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence is insufficient to support a finding that Bolden intended to communicate to the alleged target of her harassment in her email to a third party.  Accordingly, we reverse and remand for entry of a judgment of acquittal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Randy S. DeGeest, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Doyle, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (9 pages)

            Bruce Spahr appeals the order denying his application for postconviction relief (PCR), challenging his conviction for second-degree sexual abuse.  He asserts claims of ineffective assistance of his trial, appellate, and PCR counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Spahr’s trial counsel breached a duty in failing to object to testimony that impermissibly bolstered the credibility of the complaining witness.  Because witness credibility played an integral part in the jury’s decision-making, the impermissible testimony undermines confidence in the jury’s verdict.  Spahr has demonstrated ineffective assistance of trial counsel.  Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s judgment, remand for entry of an order vacating Spahr’s conviction and sentence, and grant him a new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Christopher C. Foy, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Vogel, C.J., Vaitheswaran, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, C.J.  (9 pages)

            In 2002, Quality Egg, LLC (Quality Egg), entered into an oral contract with Hickman’s Egg Ranch, Inc. (Hickman’s) to sell eggs.  In April 2008, Quality Egg received a check from Hickman’s that it determined was “short pay.”  In March 2014, Quality Egg brought suit against Hickman’s, asserting Hickman’s was due and owing upon an open account.  Hickman’s responded by asserting various defenses.  After a 2017 trial, the jury returned a verdict against Quality Egg’s claim, and Quality Egg appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the jury instructions were insufficient.  Because Quality Egg pled and presented its case-in-chief seeking a judgment on an open account, the lack of instructions to the jury on this claim is reversible error.  Therefore, we reverse and remand for a new trial limited to Quality Egg’s open-account claim.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William A. Price, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, J.  Dissent by Tabor, P.J.  (18 pages)

            Hector Martinez Lobo appeals his conviction for driving while intoxicated, claiming the district court should not have denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained during the investigatory stop of his vehicle.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the traffic stop was proper on the basis the officer had reasonable suspicion criminal activity was afoot.  We determine the district court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress.  We affirm Martinez Lobo’s conviction for operating while intoxicated.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent.  The State’s evidence did not support a finding of either probable cause or reasonable suspicion to pull over the Camaro.  The district court should have granted Martinez Lobo’s motion to suppress the evidence gathered after an impermissible traffic stop.