2022 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Stephen A. Owen, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights to their child, J.B.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding statutory grounds satisfied and termination to be in J.B.’s best interest, we affirm and decline to apply any permissive exceptions to termination as to both parents. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, James B. Malloy, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  In the alternative, she requests a guardianship rather than termination.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother waived any challenge to the statutory grounds for termination.  Termination was in the child’s best interests.  And, given the need for permanency, termination is preferable to guardianship.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (11 pages)

            R.H.C. and S.C., mother and father, appeal from the termination of their parental rights to two children, R.C. and G.C.  The father challenges whether the State made reasonable efforts to reunify him with his children, and the mother argues termination is not in the children’s best interests and she should have been granted a six-month extension.  OPINION HOLDS: The father did not preserve error to his challenge.  The mother did not preserve error as to a six-month extension and termination of her parental rights is in the children’s best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O'Brien County, David C. Larson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals from the termination of her parental rights.  She argues that termination is not in her child’s best interest, the bond between her and the child is strong enough to overcome the need for termination, and she should have been granted a six-month extension.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination is in the child’s best interests.  There was not a strong enough bond between the mother and the child to overcome the need for termination.  There was no indication that the need for termination would not exist at the end of a six-month extension.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mitchell County, Karen Kaufman Salic, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother’s only claim we may hear on appeal was that the district court should not have terminated her parental rights because of the closeness of the child-parent bond.  We affirm the district court that there is insufficient evidence of this bond so as to avoid termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William P. Kelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J.  (10 pages)

            Tyjuan Tucker appeals his conviction of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, challenging: (1) the sufficiency of the evidence; (2) the district court’s finding the underrepresentation of African-Americans in the jury pool was not due to “systematic exclusion”; (3) trial counsel’s failure to present expert testimony on the “systematic exclusion” issue; and the district court’s exclusion of both (4) documents related to a prior settlement involving Tucker, and (5) portions of body camera footage of his arrest.  OPINION HOLDS: The conviction is affirmed as: (1) there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict; (2) there was insufficient evidence of systematic exclusion; (3) Tucker is foreclosed from raising his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal; and the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding either (4) the settlement documents or (5) portions of the footage of his arrest.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  Dissent by Carr, S.J.  (10 pages)

            Spencer Antowyn Pierce appeals the summary disposition of his second application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Given the narrow constraints of Allison v. State, we affirm the dismissal of Pierce’s second application for postconviction relief.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because the claims in the second PCR action impliedly allege Pierce’s first PCR counsel was ineffective in advancing claims in his first PCR action, I would find his second PCR action falls within the Allison exception and reverse.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Andrea Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J. (27 pages)

            Hillary Hunziker appeals from her conviction of murder in the first degree.  She argues (1) the district court erred in denying a continuance based on the unavailability of her expert witness, (2) the jury instructions about the insanity defense did not correctly state the law, (3) her conviction is contrary to the weight of the evidence, (4) the district court erred in denying two requests for substitute counsel, and (5) she should be able to assert an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on this direct appeal or have her case reviewed for plain error.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in denying her request for continuance.  The jury instructions correctly stated the law regarding the insanity defense.  The conviction is supported by the weight of the evidence.  The district court gave her ample opportunity to explain her request for substitute counsel, but she did not meet the required burden.  Ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims are reserved for postconviction relief and we do not adopt plain-error review. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Bradley J. Harris, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Mullins, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (12 pages)

            Kyle Hattrup appeals his convictions and sentences for multiple crimes.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no error in the district court’s exclusion of Hattrup’s post-crime mental-health condition and treatment progress.  Also, even if the evidence should not have been excluded, the evidence had already been presented to the jury through other witnesses, so any error was harmless.  As for sentencing, the district court did not consider any improper facts or factors in deciding on Hattrup’s sentence. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Porter, Jeanie Vaudt, Scott D. Rosenberg, and Coleman McAllister, Judges.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Mullins and Ahlers, JJ.  Greer, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Mullins, P.J.  (23 pages)

            Duane Huffer appeals following the entry of a decree dissolving his marriage to Angela Doss.  He argues (1) the district court erred in allowing his first attorney to withdraw without notice to him or a hearing and allowing the attorney to disclose privileged attorney-client information; (2) the court erred in not allowing additional discovery and a deposition of Angela; (3) the court erred in finding Angela more credible, given her alleged dishonesty about domestic abuse in the past; (4) the court misvalued property; (5) the court’s distribution of assets was inequitable; (6) he should have been awarded temporary and permanent spousal support; (7) he should have been awarded temporary attorney fees and Angela should not have been awarded trial attorney fees; (8) the court erred in concluding his third attorney was ethical in withdrawing based on his refusal to follow his direction “to challenge [Angela’s] lies about domestic violence”; and (9) the court shirked its duty of impartiality.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on all issues except the attorney fee award in favor of Angela.  On our review, we are unable to conclude Angela has a need for an award or that Duane has an ability to pay.  We modify the decree to vacate the attorney fee award.  We also deny Angela’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, Craig M. Dreismeier, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (10 pages)

            Robert Hoose appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Hoose failed to prove counsel was ineffective, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding the claim of newly discovered evidence did not warrant a new trial.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (11 pages)

            Enrique Garcia appeals the dismissal of his fourth application for postconviction relief (PCR).  OPINION HOLDS: The district court properly granted the State’s motion to reconsider; Garcia’s actual innocence claims were properly dismissed; Allison v. State, 914 N.W.2d 866 (Iowa 2018), does not apply to Garcia’s case so that his ineffective-assistance-of-PCR-counsel claim could be heard; and Garcia did not suffer violation of his constitutional rights when the district court dismissed this PCR application.