April 2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Gregory D. Brandt, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Adam Burkhead appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense.  He believes the district court should have suppressed his breath test as he was unable to “validly consent to testing.”  He also condemns his trial counsel’s performance in raising the grounds for suppression.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the body camera footage showed the officer’s reasonable efforts to convey the implied consent warnings to Burkhead and to accommodate his explicit consent to submit to testing, we affirm the suppression ruling.  Next, because Burkhead’s prosecution is not one of those rare cases where the trial record alone is sufficient to resolve the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we reserve the claim for postconviction proceedings, if he decides to pursue them.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Martha L. Mertz, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (12 pages)

            Plaintiff appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm summary judgment against plaintiff granted by the district court based on defendants’ affirmative defense of substantial truth, and we also affirm on the basis of qualified privilege.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Mullins, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Darrell Bizzett appeals the order granting summary disposition of his fourth application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Ignoring any other impediments to Bizzett’s application and assuming his allegations are true, Bizzett cannot show by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable jury could have convicted him of murder. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Douglas F. Staskal, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J. (13 pages)

            Dantrell Matthews appeals his convictions for carrying weapons and criminal gang participation.  Matthews argues there was insufficient evidence to support conviction on both charges and that his counsel was ineffective in failing to challenge specific elements of both charges and an improper jury instruction.  OPINION HOLDS: Our review of the record reveals sufficient evidence was presented to convict Matthews of both crimes.  However, counsel’s failure to request an instruction on the “going” element of carrying weapons constituted failure to perform an essential duty that prejudiced Matthews.  Accordingly, Matthews’s convictions on both counts are reversed and remanded for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey D. Farrell and Scott D. Rosenberg, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Greer, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J. (5 pages)

            Thomas Domenig appeals his conviction for possession of methamphetamine, second offense.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the denial of Domenig’s motion to suppress the items found during the search of his vehicle because the search fell under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement.  Domenig’s agreement to a trial on the minutes of evidence and immediate sentencing waived his challenge to the sufficiency of the trial court’s fact findings and its failure to rule on a pro se motion to dismiss.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Emily Dean, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (10 pages)

            Heidi Fiems appeals her conviction for child endangerment.  On appeal, she raises two ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and challenges two evidentiary rulings by the trial court.  OPINION HOLDS: Fiems did not establish she received ineffective assistance from counsel, and the court did not abuse its discretion in the evidentiary rulings.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, Wyatt P. Peterson, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (7 pages)

            Midwest Storm Company, LLC (Midwest) claims the district court erred in denying its motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the plaintiffs’ claims fail as a matter of law, the district court erred in denying the motion for JNOV.  Midwest’s appellate claim regarding its motion for new trial was not preserved for appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (6 pages)

            Willie J. Wilder appeals the denial of his second postconviction-relief (PCR) application.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude that Wilder’s second PCR application does not qualify for the Allison relation-back doctrine because it was not promptly filed after conclusion of his first PCR action and is therefore time barred.  The district court correctly dismissed Wilder’s the application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kevin A. Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            Darien Sims appeals the district court decision revoking his deferred judgment on a charge of forgery and sentencing him.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Sims’s deferred judgment, as he admitted he violated terms of his probation.  We also find the district court did not improperly consider an unproven or unprosecuted offense when sentencing him.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Mary E. Howes and Tom Reidel, Judges.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            Rodney Wadden appeals his conviction for driving while barred in violation of Iowa Code sections 321.561 and 321.562 (2018) and driving with a revoked license in violation of Iowa Code section 321J.21, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained following the stop of his vehicle.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we conclude the officer did not have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify stopping Wadden’s vehicle.  We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Bethany J. Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (16 pages)

            A county board of adjustment appeals a district court decision reversing and remanding its grant of a conditional use permit for want of written findings.  OPINION HOLDS: We deny the motion to dismiss this appeal filed by the permit applicant, as we conclude the district court’s order was a final adjudication of the parties’ rights.  Because we agree the board did not substantially comply with the requirement to establish findings, the district court is affirmed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Mark Kruse, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (6 pages)

            Robert Vaughan appeals the denial of his postconviction-relief application.  He argues trial counsel was ineffective and newly-discovered evidence warrants a new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Vaughan has not met his burden of proof on any of his claims.  We affirm.