December 2021 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Angie M. Johnston, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (8 pages)

            James Hall appeals from his convictions for carrying or transporting a pistol or revolver in a vehicle, possession of a controlled substance, and possession of drug paraphernalia.  He claims he received ineffective assistance of counsel and the district court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal because his conviction for carrying or transporting a pistol or revolver in a vehicle was not supported by sufficient evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: We cannot consider Hall’s ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal.  Because Hall’s conviction for carrying or transporting a pistol or revolver is supported by sufficient evidence, the district court did not err in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Mark F. Schlenker, District Associate Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Cody Altimus appeals his conviction for animal abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Altimus has not established good cause to appeal from his guilty plea, and because we have no authority to consider his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims on appeal, we dismiss his appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Van Buren County, Crystal S. Cronk, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard by May, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  (26 pages)

            The parties to a contract for the sale of a railroad tie removal business appeal and cross-appeal from a district court ruling.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Finding no error in the district court’s determination on the contract breach, we affirm.  We find under the oral amendments, Benson should be awarded $5000, representing payment for the used high-rail gear.  We remand for modification of the judgment in Benson’s favor on appeal.  II. We find no error in the district court’s dismissal of the defendants’ counterclaim and affirm on cross-appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, John J. Bauercamper, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., May, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Shawn Chevchuc appeals the district court’s denial of his application for contempt.  OPINION HOLDS: Several of Chevchuc’s claims are not preserved for appellate review.  With respect to his preserved claims, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the application for contempt.  We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion by not disqualifying opposing counsel for a conflict of interest.  And we agree with the district court that it cannot impose sanctions on counsel for purported ethics violations.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Angela L. Doyle, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Vaitheswaran, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Joseph Peterson appeals his convictions on two counts of sexual abuse in the second degree.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is substantial evidence in the record to support the jury’s verdict.  His claims of ineffective assistance of counsel may not be raised in this direct appeal.  We affirm Peterson’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William P. Kelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            Nathan Valin appeals the district court decision denying his request for postconviction relief (PCR).  Valin claimed he was entitled to a new trial because he was improperly stopped by an Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) motor vehicle enforcement officer who did not have authority to stop vehicles or make arrests for violations of traffic regulations.  OPINION HOLDS: We find State v. Werner, 919 N.W.2d 375 (Iowa 2018) does not apply retroactively because the opinion clarified a procedural rule, rather than substantive.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge, and Lucy Gamon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Badding, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (17 pages)

            Theodore Buselmeier appeals his convictions for possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia.  He claims the district court erred in (1) denying his motion to suppress that challenged whether reasonable suspicion existed for the investigative stop; (2) admitting evidence about his vehicle and drug evidence seized from the vehicle; (3) finding sufficient evidence supported his convictions; and (4) refusing to give the jury his requested instruction on constructive possession.  OPINION HOLDS: We find (1) reasonable suspicion existed for the initial investigative stop of Buselmeier and continued while the officer diligently pursued the mission of the stop; (2) Buselmeier did not preserve error on his claim that evidence was improperly admitted at trial; (3) substantial evidence supported the verdict; and (4) no error in the trial court’s refusal to give the requested jury instruction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Jorge Perez-Castillo appeals the summary dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief.  OPNION HOLDS: The record establishes Perez-Castillo’s actual-innocence claim is not based on newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered within the three-year time frame.  Without newly discovered evidence, Perez-Castillo’s actual-innocence claim fails as untimely.  Without an actual-innocence claim, his illegal sentence claim fails as well.  His PCR action was therefore time-barred by Iowa Code section 822.3 (2016).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            Dan Dorris appeals the denial of his second application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Dorris’s claims are not timely under the exception set forth in Allison v. State, 914 N.W.2d 866, 891 (Iowa 2018), because he failed to promptly file his second postconviction action after the first concluded.  II. The statutory requirement of a reported hearing does not apply to a hearing on motions, and Dorris has not shown he was prejudiced by his counsel’s failure to demand formal reporting.  III. Dorris fails to show how the outcome of the proceeding would have differed if counsel had provided a more thorough explanation in his application for scientific testing as is statutorily required.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (6 pages)

            Thomas Ray Davis appeals the dismissal of his third application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Davis’s application was not timely, and we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (15 pages)

            Eddie Hicks appeals the summary disposition of his postconviction-relief (PCR) application.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in granting summary judgment on Hicks’s claims of a Brady violation and ineffective assistance of counsel, nor did it err in denying his motion to amend his application.  Additionally, Hicks’s PCR counsel was not ineffective.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William P. Kelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (8 pages)

            Michael Roach challenges the denial of his application for postconviction relief following his conviction of first-degree robbery and second-degree murder.  Roach believes that a 2018 supreme court ruling, Schmidt v. State, 909 N.W.2d 778 (Iowa 2018), and the 2017-enacted “stand your ground” law, Iowa Code section 704.13, combine to create a new legal ground to claim actual innocence that was not available to him during the three-year statute of limitations for his PCR claims.  OPINION HOLDS: As Iowa Code section 704.13 is not retroactive, it cannot work with the Schmidt holding to create a new legal ground.  No other issues were preserved for our review.  We affirm the denial of the PCR application.