November 2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Emmet County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (9 pages)

            Allix Betsinger appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the initial evidence was not obtained in an illegal search and Betsinger has no standing to challenge the search of another person, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Montgomery County, Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Scott Brown appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for leave to amend his petition against the City of Red Oak.  He contends the proposed amendment would not substantially change the issues before the court or unfairly surprise the defendant.  OPINION HOLDS: Although a district court has broad discretion in deciding whether to grant leave to amend pleadings, we find that discretion was abused here.  Accordingly, we reverse the ruling of the district court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey Farrell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Tabor, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            Dustin Williams appeals the denial of his Batson challenge following his convictions for possession of controlled substances.  See generally Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).  He contends the State struck a “multiracial” potential juror in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.  The State responds the prosecutor had a credible, race-neutral reason for the strike, and the district court correctly denied the challenge.  OPINION HOLDS: Relying on the perceptions of the district court, we also find the Batson challenge should be denied.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  ORDER VACATED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            S.P. appeals an order for involuntary hospitalization under Iowa Code chapter 229 (2021).  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the involuntary hospitalization order is void for lack of service and must be vacated. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (10 pages)

            David Hering appeals the dismissal of his fourth application for postconviction relief.  He argues the court erred in dismissing his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel based on new grounds of law and his claim that his convictions are void on speedy-trial grounds.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dismissal of Hering’s application for postconviction relief. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Brendan E. Greiner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            T.L. appeals the imposition of a protective order for relief from sexual abuse entered under Iowa Code chapter 236A (2021).  OPINION HOLDS: I. Substantial evidence supports a finding that a preponderance of the evidence shows T.L. committed sexual abuse.  II. T.L. has not preserved error on his claim that the court erred by appointing the guardian ad litem who moved to quash the subpoena of the child victim.  There is no showing that the court abused its discretion in granting quashal based on the child’s intellectual disability and difficulty communicating and the parents’ concern about the child testifying in person.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey D. Farrell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (7 pages)

            David Knaeble appeals from a district court order affirming the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commission’s award of disability benefits, arguing the commissioner “grossly under compensate[ed]” him “for his successive injuries”; erred in applying the statutory credit provision; and erred in finding a combined industrial disability figure of thirty-five percent.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s order affirming the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commission’s award of disability benefits to Knaeble.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Joseph B. McCarville, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Dale Spaulding appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, in violation of Iowa Code section 321J.2(2)(a) (2020).  He alleges there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of intoxication or impairment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State presented sufficient evidence upon which a rational jury could find Spaulding guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, we affirm his conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Tabor, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (19 pages)

            Thomas Beasley appeals a ruling modifying the legal custody and physical care provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Miyoko Hikiji.  He argues the court erred in failing to dismiss the petition to modify and abused its discretion in awarding trial attorney fees.  Both parties request an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s decision in its entirety, and we award Miyoko appellate attorney fees in the amount of $2000.  Costs on appeal are taxed to Thomas. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Jeffery L. Poulson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            Jodi Snyder appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage to Adam Snyder.  She argues Adam dissipated assets, the district court should have awarded her trial attorney fees and seeks appellate attorney fees.  Adam also requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Adam dissipated marital net worth by incurring additional unexplained credit card debit after the parties separated.  As a result, we modify the decree’s equalization award to Jodi.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Jodi’s request for attorney fees.  We deny Adam’s request for appellate attorney fees.  We award Jodi one-third of her reasonable and necessary appellate attorney fees and remand to the district court to determine that amount.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (10 pages)

            Leann Faye Werts challenges the Iowa Board of Parole’s (Board) denial of her conditional release based only on the seriousness of her twenty-year-old offenses.  She contends the Board’s reason is contrary to the statutory mandate that release “shall be ordered” when “there is reasonable probability that the person . . . . is able and willing to fulfill the obligations of a law-abiding citizen.”  Iowa Code § 906.4 (2021).  She maintains the Board’s denial here was contrary to law, “and given the factual record, simply irrational and illogical.”  OPINION HOLDS:  The Board’s decision denying petitioner conditional release was within its discretion as provided in section 906.4.  We affirm the district court’s finding the Board did not prejudice Werts’s substantial rights in denying release. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J. (8 pages)

            Enoc Alvarenga appeals his convictions for enticing a minor and indecent contact with a child, contending the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion in limine to exclude evidence of his arrest and imposing consecutive sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: We hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of Alvarenga’s arrest and in imposing consecutive sentences.