2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Thomas P. Murphy and Glenn E. Pille, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (4 pages)

            Christina Marie Britt appeals from her conviction for first-degree theft.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is substantial evidence Britt knew or reasonably should have known the items possessed were stolen, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Thomas P. Murphy and Glenn Pille, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (5 pages)

            Christopher Michael Retman appeals from his conviction for first-degree theft.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is substantial evidence Retman knew or reasonably should have known the items possessed were stolen, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, David A. Lester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Joseph Smith appeals the district court’s denial of his postconviction-relief application, claiming his counsel (1) should have challenged his competency to enter the plea and (2) should have explained the special sentence of lifetime parole.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err when it denied Smith’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims.  Smith’s categorical challenge to his sentence lacks merit, and Smith’s attorney could not have been effective in failing to raise it.  We affirm the district court’s denial of Smith’s postconviction-relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Mark E. Kruse, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  Dissent by Tabor, P.J.  (27 pages)

            Kimberly Ransdell contends the district court should have granted her motion for new trial.  She contends that, after granting her motion in limine foreclosing Huckleberry Entertainment, LLC’s evidence of comparative fault, the district court wrongly allowed Huckleberry Entertainment to argue that affirmative defense in closing.  She argues the district court compounded its error by instructing the jury on comparative fault.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no error and affirm the district court ruling denying Ransdell’s motion for new trial.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that there were no legal errors when the district court reversed its motion in limine on comparative fault in closing arguments and instructed the jury on the affirmative defense.  Because the district court misused the doctrine of “curative admissibility” and substantial evidence did not support submission of comparative-fault instructions to the jury, errors of law occurred in the proceedings.  And these errors materially affected Ransdell’s substantial rights as she relied on the court’s pretrial ruling throughout trial.  I would reverse and remand for retrial. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  Dissent by Doyle, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A jury convicted Scott Johnson of operating while under the influence of alcohol, in violation of Iowa Code section 321J.2 (2018).  Johnson appeals the conviction, contending that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a mistrial.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Johnson’s motion for mistrial after the State inadvertently disclosed the results of Johnson’s preliminary breath test.  We affirm.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I cannot say the proof that Johnson was under the influence was so strong as to overcome the prejudice of the jury’s hearing the results of the preliminary breath test.  I believe Johnson met his heavy burden to show prejudice, which prevented him from having a fair trial.  I would reverse and remand for a new trial. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Sean W. McPartland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (15 pages)

            Gayle Transgrud appeals the district court order granting defendant Michael Leer’s motion for summary judgment and denying her own motion for summary judgment in her suit brought in relation to injuries she sustained while riding in a semi-tractor owned by Leer and operated by Transgrud’s spouse.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there are no genuine issues of material fact and Leer is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the district court properly denied Transgrud’s motion for summary judgment, granted Leer’s motion for summary judgment, and dismissed the suit.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Doyle, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  Dissent by Doyle, J.  (7 pages)

            A grandmother appeals the striking of her demand for a jury trial on her petition to establish involuntary guardianships for her son’s children, who are in the legal custody of their mother.  OPINION HOLDS: Where there is no question that the proposed wards are minors, we find no error in the court’s denial of a jury trial on that issue.  DISSENT ASSERTS: In striking the grandmother’s jury demand, the district court decided that the issue of whether the children’s mother was not a qualified or suitable caregiver was not part of the jury’s determination that a guardianship was required.  Necessity for appointment of a guardian is a jury question.  And whether a parent is a qualified and suitable caregiver is a part of the necessity question.  The district court erroneously struck the jury demand.  I would reverse and remand for a jury trial.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Peter B. Newell, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Brent Foster appeals his conviction of domestic abuse assault.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State presented substantial evidence on the issue of identification.  Through her testimony, the complaining witness identified Foster as her husband, as the person who committed the assault, and as the person in the courtroom.  We affirm Foster’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Fae Hoover Grinde, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (21 pages)

            Christian Sousley appeals his convictions of second-degree sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of a minor.  He argues the district court abused its discretion in overruling an objection to expert testimony claimed to be beyond the scope of the minutes of evidence, the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and the court erred in overruling his motions for judgment of acquittal, his counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to object to improper vouching testimony, and the court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial on his claim the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no cause for reversal, we affirm Sousley’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (12 pages pages)

            Michael Holmes appeals the denial of his motion for new trial following a defense verdict in this negligence case arising from the collision of Holmes’s bicycle with Miranda Pomeroy’s automobile.  OPINION HOLDS: (1) The district court did not abuse its discretion by limiting questioning designed to elicit hearsay or preventing counsel from arguing hearsay evidence supported Holmes’s case; (2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of Holmes’s admissions that the accident was “his fault”; (3) the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to admit evidence that Pomeroy used a phone while driving as habit evidence under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.406; and (4) error was not preserved on Holmes’s complaints about misconduct during closing arguments.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Rustin T. Davenport, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (13 pages)

            Round appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute, asserting: (1) the court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, and (2) the court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial based on the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports Round’s conviction for possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Round’s motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, Gregory W. Steensland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A defendant appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress, arguing the sheriff deputy exceeded a Terry search for weapons and his search was not incident to a lawful arrest.  OPINION HOLDS: The court properly denied the defendant’s motion as the deputy was authorized to make a lawful arrest when the defendant committed the simple misdemeanor in his presence.