September 2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (7 pages)

            Jesus Ramirez appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, which alleged ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal following his criminal convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that Ramirez did not meet his burden to show prejudice, and we accordingly affirm the denial of his application for postconviction relief. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, George L. Stigler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (4 pages)

            Keith Walker appeals the denial of his application for post-conviction relief.  He alleges newly discovered evidence provides an exception to the Iowa Code section 822.3 (2019) bar on his claims.  He also asks us to apply State v. Plain, 898 N.W.2d 801, 826 (Iowa 2017), retroactively.  OPINION HOLDS: Walker failed to present newly discovered evidence.  Accordingly, his claims are barred by section 822.3.  Further, we cannot apply Plain retroactively.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Tabor, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (12 pages)

            Jason Sassman appeals his conviction for second-degree murder contending the verdicts on his first-degree murder and animal abuse charges were inconsistent.  He also challenges admission of autopsy photographs and the State’s proof of malice aforethought.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no inconsistency in the verdicts, no abuse of discretion in the evidentiary ruling, and ample evidence of malice.  So we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  Partial Dissent by Tabor, P.J.  (22 pages)

            Christopher Allen appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) following his 2015 convictions for two counts of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (cocaine base), ongoing criminal conduct, and a drug tax stamp violation.  Allen argues for the first time that the disparity between sentences for crack and powder cocaine violate the Equal Protection Clauses of both the Federal and Iowa Constitutions.  Allen also argues the district court wrongly denied his application for PCR, claiming he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel when counsel failed to research and present the police video of the vehicle stop at the suppression hearing and trial and object to the district court’s failure to read the verdicts in open court.  He argues appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a timely application for further review of this court’s ruling on his direct appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is a rational basis for the disparity in sentences between crack and powder cocaine dealers, Allen has not shown that Iowa Code section 124.401 (2015) violates equal protection.  And Allen did not prove he received ineffective assistance from either trial or appellate counsel.  We affirm.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent.  I would find Iowa Code section 124.401 (2015) violates our equal protection clause as there is no rational relationship between the old ten-to-one sentencing disparity between crack-cocaine and powder-cocaine offenses and a legitimate government interest.  I would reverse and remand for resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (9 pages)

            Plaintiffs in an asbestos action appeal the district court’s ruling that granted two defendants’ motions for summary judgment based on Iowa Code section 686B.7(5) (2018).  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court misinterpreted section 686B.7(5).  That section does not limit liability for the defendants in this action, and summary judgment in their favor was improper.  We reverse and remand for further proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, Ann M. Gales, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Tabor, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  Special concurrence by Blane, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Adam Driesen appeals the denial of his motion to suppress, arguing the evidence was collected as a result of an illegal search and seizure in violation of the United States Constitution and Iowa Constitution.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the suppression ruling and Driesen’s conviction, judgment, and sentence for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, second offense.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS:  Driesen’s argument is lacking in logic and legal authority, and I would affirm without opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Special Concurrence by Tabor, J. (10 pages)

            Revette Sauser appeals her conviction for murder in the first degree, claiming the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter.  OPINION HOLDS: Because none of Sauser’s stories about the events leading up to the shooting support a finding that she acted solely out of the required level of provocation, the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter. SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Like the majority, I would affirm Sauser’s conviction.  But I would find the court erred in not instructing the jury on voluntary manslaughter.  Still, this instructional error is not cause for reversal.  Because they returned a guilty verdict on a higher charge, there is no prejudice for the failure to instruct on manslaughter. 

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

            Gary Wood appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  He seeks relief from his guilty plea to domestic abuse assault, second offense.  In this PCR appeal, he argues he is actually innocent of the charge.  OPINION HOLDS: Given the issues with the victim’s recantations, Wood has not provided clear and convincing evidence no reasonable factfinder would convict him of domestic abuse assault considering all of the evidence.  We affirm the denial of his PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Mitchell E. Turner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (4 pages)

            Murl McMullin appeals the denial of his postconviction-relief application.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the application is untimely, we affirm.    

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John G. Linn, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. Special concurrence by Greer, J.  (14 pages)

            Stephen Swanson appeals the grant of summary judgment for the defendants on claims related to disclosing information in his personnel record.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Because nothing in the record supports a finding that Swanson exhausted all contractual, legal, and statutory remedies after a final disciplinary action, the disclosure of his personnel record was not permitted under the open records statute.  II. Swanson’s blacklisting claim fails as a matter of law because he only presents speculation and conjecture to show the defendants intended to injure him by preventing future employment.  III. Swanson failed to show a factual dispute on whether the statements Oldenburger made in disclosing the termination notice were false or made with actual malice, so his defamation claim fails as a matter of law.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in the majority opinion but write separately to offer additional support for the analysis of the open records violation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Devon Wendler Alvord appeals the district court’s denial of her petition to modify the parties’ agreement to share joint physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the denial of Devon’s petition to modify the dissolution decree.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hamilton County, Derek Johnson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Nicholas Janvrin appeals the district court’s order denying his motion in arrest of judgment, requesting his guilty plea be set aside.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Janvrin’s plea, conviction, and sentence for third-degree burglary.