2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (3 pages)

            Parents separately appeal a permanency order transferring guardianship and custody of their child, born in 2004, to a suitable other pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(d)(1) (2018).  Both parents argue the court should have instead directed the State to institute termination proceedings under section 232.104(2)(c).  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court that transfer of guardianship to suitable others is the best permanency option, termination would be contrary to the child’s best interests, services were offered to alleviate the need for removal, and the child cannot be returned to the parental home.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., May, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the permanency order transferring custody and guardianship of her thirteen-year-old son to his current placement, his step-father, and finding the State made reasonable efforts at reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother has waived her argument the State failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite her with the child.  And we agree with the district court that services have been offered to correct the circumstances leading to removal of A.D., and yet the child cannot return to the mother’s home.  We affirm the juvenile court permanency order. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Greer, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (12 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child, born in 2018.  The mother challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the statutory ground for termination cited by the juvenile court, argues the Iowa Department of Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts at reunification, and requests a six-month extension to work toward reunification.  The father challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting termination, argues termination is contrary to the child’s best interests, questions the State’s reasonable efforts at reunification, maintains a guardianship should have been established in a relative in lieu of termination, asks for the application of statutory exceptions to termination, and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court order terminating his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is sufficient evidence in the record to support termination of the father’s parental rights, termination is in the child’s best interests, and extending this case for an additional six months is not warranted.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother and father appeal the juvenile court decision finding their children were in need of assistance (CINA).  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the juvenile court properly determined the children should be adjudicated CINA.  The parents were not adequately addressing the children’s medical, dental, and educational needs.  The children could not be returned to the parents’ care at the time of the dispositional hearing.  We concur in the court’s placement of the children.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (8 pages)

            Kalandis McNeil appeals his conviction for failure to comply with sex-offender registry requirements with a habitual-offender enhancement.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court’s denial of McNeil’s motion for new trial was not an abuse of discretion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (13 pages)

            Brian Koncel appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief following his 1997 conviction for first-degree kidnapping.  He challenges the court’s denial of several ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and raises additional claims.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the denial of Koncel’s postconviction-relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (3 pages)

            Thomas Holmes appeals from the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  He asserts the district court convicted and sentenced him under nonexistent sections of the Iowa Code.  OPINION HOLDS: Holmes raises the very same issues raised in his prior proceedings.  His claims fail for the same reasons they failed last time, in addition to now failing on the principle of res judicata.  We affirm the district court without further opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (6 pages)

            Gregory Pollow appeals the district court denial of his motion for new trial.  Pollow argues he should have been granted a new trial based on allegedly inappropriate comments from opposing counsel during closing arguments.  OPINION HOLDS: Defense counsel’s comments regarding stipulations entered into evidence by the claimant did not improperly instruct the jury.  No attorney misconduct occurred that would give rise to new trial.  We affirm the district court’s denial of the motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Sarah E. Crane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Kirkwood Commons, LLC appeals the entry of declaratory judgment in its favor, contending that it is entitled to more money per month for common area and maintenance fees because an addendum to the lease agreement was invalid and unenforceable.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the court’s determination that the addendum was agreed to by both parties, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, William C. Ostlund, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (10 pages)

            Daniel Jensen appeals the denial of his application for contempt.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding Daniel either failed to preserve error or raised arguments having no merit, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (4 pages)

            Michael Mayton appeals the district court order denying his application for postconviction relief, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective by not giving an opening statement.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude Mayton has failed to prove his trial counsel was ineffective and affirm the district court order.