September 2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J. (11 pages)

            Kyle Olson appeals following his conviction of forgery, arguing the State presented insufficient evidence to support his conviction.  He also contends the district court abused its discretion by considering improper factors in determining the sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the totality of the evidence, because a reasonable juror could find that Olson had the specific intent to defraud or injure his sisters when he deposited the insurance check, we affirm his conviction.  We affirm Olson’s sentence because there was no affirmative proof the court relied on unproven offenses. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (10 pages)

            Nicholas Kanetomo (Nick) appeals, and Nicole Kanetomo cross-appeals, a decree modifying a dissolution-of-marriage decree.  Nick argues the court erred in not awarding him joint legal custody and the modification to the visitation provisions of the decree “are so minimal as to be effectively meaningless.”  Nicole argues the court erred in finding Nick met his burden to warrant any modification in visitation.  Nick requests an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s refusal to modify legal custody.  We agree modification of visitation was appropriate, but we modify the visitation schedule imposed by the district court.  We deny Nick’s request for appellate attorney fees.  Costs on appeal are assessed equally between the parties. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (6 pages)

            Neal Johnson appeals his conviction of burglary in the second degree, arguing there was insufficient evidence to prove that he acted with the specific intent to commit sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the record contains sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find Johnson had the specific intent to commit sexual abuse.  We affirm Johnson’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Gina C. Badding, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (14 pages)

            After she defaulted on agreements to pay a mortgage debt, First American Bank (First American) moved for summary judgment to collect the monies from Cheryl Johnson.The district court ruled in favor of the bank and entered a foreclosure decree and an attorney fee judgment against Johnson.Johnson raised claims of abuse of legal process for the bank’s efforts to seek a conservatorship over her.She appeals the dismissal of her counterclaim.She also argues she was not in default of her agreement with the bank and it was error for the district court to grant the bank’s summary judgment.Finally, Johnson disputes the attorney fee award as unreasonable.First American argues that only the attorney fee question is properly before us for consideration because the appeal on the issues resolved by summary judgment is untimely.  OPINION HOLDS: We deny First American’s motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely and affirm the district court on all other issues raised on this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Oscar Nunez Cabrera appeals the district court’s sentencing order, contending the sentence is grossly disproportionate to his crimes and the court abused its discretion by failing to adequately address mitigating circumstances and his potential for rehabilitation.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s sentencing order and Nunez Cabrera’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Jennifer S. Bailey, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (14 pages)

            A father appeals the district court's ruling terminating his parental rights to his daughter, O.G., following an action initiated by the child’s mother under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2019).  OPINION HOLDS: The father argues the court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence that he abandoned his daughter within the meaning of Iowa Code section 600A.8(3).  He also argues termination is not in O.G.’s best interest and asserts the district court should have appointed O.G. an attorney separate from O.G.’s guardian ad litem.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Kevin Lancial appeals from summary judgment granted for the defendants in his gross negligence suit.  OPINION HOLDS: To establish his co-employees were grossly negligent, Lancial must show defendants had: “(1) knowledge of the peril to be apprehended; (2) knowledge that injury is a probable, as opposed to a possible, result of the danger; and (3) a conscious failure to avoid the peril.”  Thompson v. Bohlken, 312 N.W.2d 501, 505 (Iowa 1981).  Because the evidence did not support the second element, grant of summary judgment was proper.    

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Crystal S. Cronk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (2 pages)

            James Harwood Jr. pleaded guilty to sexual abuse in the third degree.  He appeals, claiming his counsel was ineffective in allowing him to plead guilty without properly investigating or raising an issue as to his mental capacity.  OPINION HOLDS: By operation of statute, we lack jurisdiction to hear Harwood’s appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Emily Dean, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Greer, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, contending the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decision of the juvenile court to terminate the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph L. Tofilon, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (11 pages)

            The State appeals the juvenile court’s decision denying a child-in-need-of-assistance petition.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the juvenile court should have granted the State’s petition for adjudication of the child as a child in need of assistance under Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2) (2020).  We also conclude the court should have continued the removal of the child from the parents’ care.  We reverse the decision of the juvenile court and remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A grandmother appeals the denial of her petitions to adopt two children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because DHS’s consent was necessary to the adoption, consent was withdrawn prior to the adoption hearing, and DHS made its decision in the best interests of the children, we affirm the juvenile court’s denial of the grandmother’s petitions to adopt.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O'Brien County, David C. Larson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals a juvenile court decision adjudicating her child to be in need of assistance (CINA).  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence shows it is imminently likely the child will suffer harmful effects from the care provided by those the mother chooses to watch the child.  Furthermore, we find the CINA adjudication is in the child’s best interests.  The child has special needs, and it is important that he receive care commensurate with those special needs.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.