2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wayne County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  REVERSED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (10 pages)

            Ronald Mehrhoff Jr. appeals the district court ruling that he was unjustly enriched by payments his former romantic partner, Tamera Atwell, made toward a car loan in his name.  The court ordered Mehrhoff to pay Atwell $13,105.56.  Mehrhoff argues (1) Atwell should not be able to recover under the theory of unjust enrichment because there was an express agreement between the parties and (2) the twenty-seven payments Atwell made did not confer a benefit on him or, alternatively, that it was not unjust for him to retain the benefit of the payments.  OPINION HOLDS: Because an express agreement about the vehicle existed, we agree with Mehrhoff that the district court improperly applied the doctrine of unjust enrichment to this case.  We reverse. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (25 pages)

            Taylor Sundby appeals the district court’s decree dissolving his marriage to Ali. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decree of dissolution and modify financial provisions.  We remand for further proceedings including a determination of appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Lance Brooks appeals the dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief.  Brooks admits he filed this application after the three-year statute of limitations under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2020) had expired.  But he claims that his action is saved by the relation-back doctrine in Allison v. State, 914 N.W.2d 866 (Iowa 2018).  OPINION HOLDS: Because our legislature amended section 822.3 to abrogate Allison, Brooks is left without a lifeline.  Thus, we affirm the dismissal of his untimely application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (22 pages).

            An applicant appeals the denial of his postconviction-relief application.  He alleges his trial counsel was ineffective due to the failure to object to several instances of prosecutorial misconduct, the failure to object to the admissibility of evidence, and the failure to pursue alternative defenses.  OPINION HOLDS: Clancy has failed to meet his burden required for postconviction relief.  Consequently, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  JUDGMENT AND SENTENCES CONDITIONALLY AFFIRMED, RULING ON NEW TRIAL MOTION VACATED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Marquis Brumfield appeals his convictions for going armed with intent, possession of a firearm by a felon, and carrying weapons.  He contends the trial court used the wrong standard in denying his motion for new trial and considered improper factors in imposing sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: The court employed an improper standard in ruling on the motion for new trial, but did not abuse its sentencing discretion.  We conditionally affirm the convictions and sentences but vacate the district court’s ruling on the motion for new trial and remand the case for the district court to apply the weight-of-the-evidence standard.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Bethany J. Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (9 pages)

        Abigail Carter appeals the district court’s dismissal of her application for postconviction relief seeking resentencing under her chosen name.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Carter has not established the use of her legal name is objectively harmful enough to establish a constitutional violation or that the Iowa Department of Corrections exhibits deliberate indifference by using it, her claim of cruel and unusual punishment fails, and we affirm the dismissal of her application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Thomas G. Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (5 pages)

            Toby Richards appeals the dismissal of his three applications for postconviction relief (PCR).  OPINION HOLDS: Richards is not entitled to relief relating to any of his three PCR applications.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Grundy County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  WRIT SUSTAINED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Christopher Buck appeals the denial of his application to modify sexual offender registration requirements, contending: (1) “the district court’s conclusion that [he] did not meet the threshold requirement of being low risk should be reversed as that conclusion was not supported by substantial evidence” and (2) “the district court abused its discretion in denying [his] application for modification.”  OPINION HOLDS: Because the focus here was on past crimes and past patterns of behavior, we sustain the writ and remand for consideration of the modification application in light of Fortune v. State, 957 N.W.2d 696 (Iowa 2021).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick McElyea, Judge, and Christine Dalton, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A defendant appeals his sentence on grounds that the district court impermissibly sentenced him based on his decision to stand trial.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court properly based its decision on the defendant’s lack of remorse.  There was no abuse of discretion, and the sentence is affirmed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Tod Deck, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Badding, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Rodney Jackson appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  He claims actual innocence and that he pleaded guilty in the underlying criminal action because he was under duress.  OPINION HOLDS: Jackson did not file a motion in arrest of judgment to raise his duress claim.  Because Jackson failed to raise the issue when he was first able to and does not provide a sufficient reason for failing to previously raise the issue, he cannot raise the issue for the first time in this PCR action.  Jackson’s actual innocence claim fails because video footage and police reports support his conviction for assault causing bodily injury.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Benjamin Monson appeals his convictions for two counts of third-degree sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Monson has failed to demonstrate that any prejudice arising from joinder outweighed the State’s interest in judicial economy, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s refusal to sever his charges.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Heather Lauber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (7 pages)

            Jim Thygesen appeals the district court’s ruling on judicial review reversing the decision of the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commissioner awarding compensation benefits.  Thygesen contends the district court erred in “reaching different factual conclusions than the commissioner with respect to the date of injury and date of discovery” of his hearing loss and tinnitus.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supported the findings that Thygesen’s injury manifested a decade before he filed his claim and Thygesen knew the injury was work related.  As the district court concluded, the agency’s contrary determination required reversal.