August 2021 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            The mother and father appeal the juvenile court’s adjudicatory and dispositional orders in this child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we reach the same conclusions reached by the juvenile court.  Grounds for adjudication have been established.  Placing the child in the mother’s custody with supervision and prohibitions on the father having contact with the child is an appropriate disposition at this time.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (3 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights arguing termination is not in the child’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination is in the child’s best interest.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Mary L. Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children.  She argues the juvenile court erred in finding the children could not be returned to her care and she had a substance-abuse problem.  She also argues termination is not in the best interests of the children.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that the State proved the grounds for termination pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (h) (2021) by clear and convincing evidence.  We also find that termination is in the best interests of the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Union County, Monty Franklin, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a seven-year-old child.  OPINION HOLDS: It is in the child’s best interests to terminate the father’s parental rights, so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Lars Anderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, P.J.  (12 pages)

            Robinson raises three issues on appeal.  First, he contends the prosecutor’s closing argument comments on Robinson’s credibility that his trial testimony was “ludicrous,” “ridiculous,” and “bogus” were improper and prejudicial.  Second, he argues his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to object to State’s evidence of “prayer” by Robinson during his police interview.  Third, he contends the PCR court misconstrued Iowa Code section 81.8(5) (2019) in denying Robinson’s request for a DNA sample.  OPINION HOLDS:  Robinson failed to preserve error on the prosecutorial misconduct issue, but even had he preserved error we find no ineffective assistance on the part of his counsel in failing to object to the prosecutor’s comments.  His ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim about the “prayer” lacks merit.  Robinson is not entitled to DNA records under Iowa Code section 81.8(4)-(5).  Thus, we affirm the denial of Robinson’s PCR application.               

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J. (4 pages)

            Randy Crawford brings an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal.  Recognizing that Iowa Code section 814.7 (Supp. 2019) prevents us from deciding claims of ineffective assistance on direct appeal, Crawford argues the statute violates separation-of-powers doctrine, equal protection, and his right to due process.  Lastly, if we cannot consider his claim under the framework of ineffective assistance, Crawford asks us to adopt plain error review.  OPINION HOLDS: Because section 814.7 prevents us from deciding Crawford’s claim of ineffective assistance on direct appeal and he has not proved section 814.7 is unconstitutional, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Patrice Eichman, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Cassandra Greenway brings an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal.  Recognizing that Iowa Code section 814.7 (Supp. 2019) prevents us from deciding claims of ineffective assistance on direct appeal, Greenway argues the statute violates separation-of-powers doctrine, equal protection, and her right to due process.  In the alternative, if we cannot consider her claim under the framework of ineffective assistance, Greenway asks us to adopt plain error review.  OPINION HOLDS: Because section 814.7 prevents us from deciding Greenway’s claim of ineffective assistance on direct appeal and she has not proved section 814.7 is unconstitutional, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (3 pages)

            Cassandra Greenway appeals her conviction for theft in the second degree, raising two points of ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Under a recent statutory amendment to Iowa Code section 814.7 (Supp. 2019), we lack authority to decide Greenway’s ineffective‑assistance-of-counsel claims on direct appeal.  Thus we affirm.  Greenway may still raise her claims in a postconviction-relief proceeding. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Gina Badding, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Greer, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (3 pages)

            Cornelius Gully appeals his conviction for first-degree burglary, raising a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Because a legislative amendment to Iowa Code section 814.7 (2019) removed our authority to hear ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims on direct appeal, we cannot decide Gully’s challenge.  Thus, he must raise his claim in a postconviction‑relief action.  We affirm. 

            Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William P. Kelly, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (3 pages)

            James Hayes III appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to correct his sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the court’s order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Monica Zrinyi Wittig, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (15 pages)

            Pamela Sellner, Tom Sellner, Cricket Hollow Zoo, Inc. and Pamela J. Sellner Tom J. Sellner, an Iowa General Partnership, D/B/A Cricket Hollow Zoo appeal the district court’s declaratory judgment and order of injunction.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Robert J. Richter, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (2 pages)

            Austine Thomas appeals from his guilty pleas for offenses that are not “A” felonies.  He claims he received ineffective assistance because counsel allowed him to plead guilty without a factual basis to support his pleas.  OPINION HOLDS: Thomas has not established good cause to challenge his guilty pleas.  And, even if he could establish good cause, we are prohibited from deciding his claim of ineffective assistance on direct appeal.  We affirm.