Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 19-1203
View Summary for Case No. 19-1203
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by May, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Potterfield, S.J. Opinion by Potterfield, S.J. (11 pages)
Kourtney Shontez Hall appeals his conviction for second-degree burglary, contending the trial court abused its discretion in allowing evidence of a prior bad act. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 19-1510
View Summary for Case No. 19-1510
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., Greer, J., and Potterfield, S.J. Opinion by Potterfield, S.J. (16 pages)
Elisha Mischke was charged by trial information with ongoing criminal conduct. The trial information alleged that Mischke and two others, “individually, or by joint criminal conduct, or by aiding and abetting another” “commit[ted] multiple acts of residential burglaries, vehicle burglaries, vehicle theft, credit card fraud, identity theft, operating a motor vehicle without owner’s consent, and possession of stolen property.” As part of a plea agreement in which other charges and other criminal cases were dismissed, Mischke pled guilty to the class “B” felony. She was given a suspended, thirty-five year sentence and later ordered to pay $22,822.13 in restitution based on eleven separate claims. On appeal, Mischke challenges the ordered restitution. First, she argues the district court erred in approving supplemental restitution requests that were untimely made. And second, she maintains the State failed to prove a causal connection between her criminal conduct and the restitution ordered. OPINION HOLDS: Mischke has good cause to challenge the restitution she was ordered to pay as part of her sentence. The thirty-day requirement to request restitution is directory, not mandatory, and Mischke did not establish she was prejudiced by the delayed restitution request. We do not reach Mischke’s challenge to the causal connection between the restitution ordered and her criminal acts, except her challenge to the missing bicycle, which we find is causally related. We affirm the ordered restitution of $22,822.13 based on eleven separate claims.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 20-0130
View Summary for Case No. 20-0130
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Gregory G. Milani, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Bower, C.J. (9 pages)
Kaleb Morrow appeals his convictions for interference with official acts—serious injury, assault on persons in certain occupations, and harassment in the first degree. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence of intent to inflict serious injury and an evidentiary ruling. OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the finding the defendant had the specific intent to inflict serious injury to support the convictions and Morrow suffered no prejudice from the evidentiary ruling, we affirm.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 20-0384
View Summary for Case No. 20-0384
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by May, P.J., and Vogel and Mullins, S.J.J. Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (9 pages)
Joseph Rendon appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief. OPINION HOLDS: We reject Rendon’s claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present an alibi witness or for failing to further impeach the State’s witnesses. We also find no cumulative prejudice resulted from these claims of ineffective assistance.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 20-1310
View Summary for Case No. 20-1310
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. Partial dissent by Greer, J. (16 pages)
K.E. Builders, L.L.C.; Darin Keller; and Taloyre Keller appeal the district court’s decision awarding damages to J.A. Smith Machinery Co., Ltd. on its claim of conversion of a skid loader. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court on the grant of summary judgment on liability and the award of compensatory damages. We reverse the court’s decision on the issue of punitive damages. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur with the majority opinion with one exception—I would affirm the district court’s award of punitive damages to J.A. Smith Machinery Company, Ltd. I believe that Smith Machinery showed by a preponderance of the evidence that Darin and Taloyre Kellers’ conduct amounted to a willful and wanton disregard for Smith Machinery’s right to the skid loader.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 20-1651
View Summary for Case No. 20-1651
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary Hindman, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (11 pages)
Juan Antonio Nino-Estrada appeals the orders dismissing and denying the claims in his application for postconviction relief. OPINION HOLDS: I. Trial counsel was not ineffective in presenting a justification defense. Counsel made a strategic decision to limit Nino-Estrada’s direct examination and presented an effective argument on justification in closing, and there is no reasonable probability that a more thorough direct examination would have changed the outcome of trial. II. Nino-Estrada’s claims that the trial court failed to properly instruct the jury on the legal concept of unanimity and the burden of proof for justification fail as a matter of law because the instructions did not misstate the law or mislead the jury.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 20-1720
View Summary for Case No. 20-1720
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt L. Wilke, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ. Badding, J., takes no part. Opinion by May, J. (13 pages)
Keith Puntenney appeals a district court order denying his motion for new trial. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings nor did it err in instructing the jury on damages.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-0065
View Summary for Case No. 21-0065
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Chad A. Kepros, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (14 pages)
Capital Commercial Division, LLC appeals from an adverse judgment following a bench trial on the parties’ dueling breach‑of-contract claims. OPINION HOLDS: Finding no merit in any of Capital’s challenges, we affirm.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-0172
View Summary for Case No. 21-0172
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mullins, S.J. Opinion by Mullins, S.J. (20 pages)
Crystal Meints appeals the decree dissolving her marriage to Jeffrey Meints (Jeff). She argues (1) the court’s property distribution is inequitable for various reasons, (2) the court erred in not concluding Jeff dissipated marital assets, (3) the court’s award of spousal support in her favor was inadequate, and (4) the court’s award of trial attorney fees in her favor was insufficient. Crystal requests an award of appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s distribution of property and challenged valuations. We reject Crystal’s claims the court failed to distribute some assets, but we modify the decree to require Jeff to pay Crystal one-half of the Iowa state tax refund. We determine Crystal’s request that the equalization order be modified to a ten-year payment schedule is equitable and modify the decree accordingly. We affirm the district court’s refusal to grant security for the equalization award, and we decline Crystal’s request for an acceleration clause relating to the equalization payment. We reject Crystal’s claims of dissipation of assets by Jeff. We affirm the amount of spousal support awarded by the district court, $3000.00 per month, but we modify the decree to provide Jeff’s obligation will continue until either party’s death or Crystal’s remarriage. We affirm the district court’s ruling on Crystal’s request for trial and expert fees, and we decline Crystal’s request for appellate attorney fees. Costs on appeal are assessed equally between the parties.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-0272
View Summary for Case No. 21-0272
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O'Brien County, Charles Borth, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by May, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mullins, S.J. Opinion by May, P.J. (9 pages)
Sarah Jones appeals the district court order modifying her dissolution decree from Matthew Jones and finding Sarah in contempt. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the modification decree and the contempt finding; and we grant Matthew appellate attorney fees.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-0354
View Summary for Case No. 21-0354
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Coleen D. Weiland, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (13 pages)
McKinley Dudley appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief (PCR). Dudley asserts his PCR counsel failed to clarify what convictions were implicated, leading to a dismissal of his PCR application without full consideration of the 2012 conviction. Based on this allegation, he maintains PCR counsel provided ineffective assistance. OPINION HOLDS: PCR counsel did not provide ineffective assistance. Even if the 2012 case number was listed on the amended PCR application, Dudley could not succeed. His claims as to the 2012 case are time-barred. And he has previously raised the issues he now wishes to re-litigate in this PCR action. We affirm the dismissal of Dudley’s PCR action.
Filed Jan 27, 2022
View Opinion No. 21-0400
View Summary for Case No. 21-0400
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Nicholas Scott, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Scott, S.J. Opinion by Scott, J. (10 pages)
Scott Smith appeals his conviction of domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury and the sentence imposed. He argues the district court (1) “erred by refusing to admit favorable, relevant defense evidence and by denying [his] motion for a mistrial” based on that claim and (2) “abused its discretion when it imposed a fine and the crime services surcharge” as part of his sentence. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Smith’s conviction and the sentence imposed.