February 2024 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, David C. Larson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Carlos Martin Sebastian appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress certain evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: The arresting deputy reasonably conveyed the implied consent warnings to Martin Sebastian before he submitted to chemical testing.  To the extent that Martin Sebastian challenges the admissibility of field sobriety test results, his arguments go to the weight of the results, not the admissibility.  The district court correctly denied the motion to suppress.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (15 pages)

            Randy Cue appeals the denial of his applications for DNA profiling and postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Cue has not established his trial and appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance, and his application did not meet the requirements for the court to order further DNA testing.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for robbery in the second degree.  He contends the State offered insufficient evidence to prove the assault or threat alternative of robbery.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, we find the record contains sufficient evidence to support the conviction.  Thus, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  SENTENCE AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (8 pages)

            Trisha Kountkofsky appeals the restitution order requiring her to pay victim pecuniary damages and category “B” restitution.  OPINION HOLDS: The sentencing court listed incorrect code sections in its restitution order, and we remand with directions to enter a nunc pro tunc order correcting those errors.  We do not address the entry of victim pecuniary damages as Kountkofsky did not exhaust her remedies for challenging them in the district court, and we affirm the category “B” restitution determination as Kountkofsky failed to file a financial affidavit and waived her right to a hearing on her reasonable ability to pay.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Richard B. Clogg, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Ahlers and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Ahlers, J. (19 pages)

            Jeff Osborne appeals the district court’s property distribution, valuation, and tax liability assignment following entry of a dissolution decree.  Jaime Ocean cross-appeals the spousal support award and property distribution in the decree.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the property distribution, valuations, and tax liability assignment are equitable, modify the spousal support award, and affirm as modified. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS:  I dissent in part because I find the property distribution to be inequitable and would value an IPERS account using the Benson formula when dividing the parties’ assets.  As my concurrence with the majority’s modification of the spousal-support award is contingent on also modifying the property division as I proposed, I also dissent as to the change to the spousal-support award.  However, I concur with the majority’s decision to deny the cross-appeal challenging the dissolution decree’s life insurance provision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, John J. Haney, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., Buller, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Buller, J. (11 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for murder in the first degree and child endangerment resulting in death.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the convictions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J. (11 pages)

            Antonio Kitch appeals the sentences imposed following his guilty plea to neglect or abandonment of a dependent person and Alford plea to child endangerment resulting in bodily injury.  OPINION HOLDS: The sentencing court considered individual circumstances and factors related to Kitch and did not rely on a fixed sentencing scheme.  Although the court made comments about its belief in God, that belief did not influence the sentences imposed.  The court did consider mitigating factors and was not required to list all mitigating factors considered.  For these reasons, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            Angela Vargas and Mitchell Crawford, as parents and next friends of their child, appeal the district court’s ruling granting the defendants’ motion for directed verdict in this medical malpractice case.  The appellants argue they presented substantial evidence to support their claim for lost chance of a better outcome.  OPINION HOLDS: Assuming without deciding that Iowa recognizes a cause of action for lost chance of a better outcome, we conclude the plaintiffs failed to present substantial evidence to warrant submission of the claim to the jury.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Buller, J., and Mullins, S.J.* Opinion by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            A claimant appeals from judicial review following denial of his workers’ compensation claim, asserting the commissioner and district court erred in their interpretation of Iowa’s private-employer drug-testing law and the presumptions afforded positive drug tests under the workers’ compensation statute.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court and commissioner correctly interpreted the statutes and substantial evidence supports the commissioner’s factual determinations, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            Daniel Murillo appeals the denial of his application to modify sex offender registry requirements, claiming the court erred in determining he did not satisfy one of the threshold requirements for modification and abused its discretion in otherwise concluding modification should not occur.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no legal error or abuse of discretion, we affirm the district court’s denial of Murillo’s application to modify.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            Janelle Wilcox appeals the denial of her petition for judicial review of final agency action, challenging the denial of her request to add stand-alone transportation services to the monthly budget she receives through a home- and community-based services Medicaid waiver program.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the agency reached the correct result by affirming the denial of Wilcox’s request, we affirm the denial of her petition for judicial review.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Celene Gogerty, Judge. AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (6 pages)

            John Davis appeals the district court’s dismissal of thirteen claims related to fraudulent transfer of real property and conversion of personal property against Christine Frank, Tristan Frank, and Does 1–30.  OPINION HOLDS: Error was not preserved on the issue of the applicability of the doctrine of equitable estoppel, and claims related to the 2014 transfer of property are barred by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.943.