Filed Apr 24, 2024
View Opinion No. 24-0071
View Summary for Case No. 24-0071
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (7 pages)
Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to three children. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.
Filed Apr 24, 2024
View Opinion No. 24-0284
View Summary for Case No. 24-0284
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (5 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. She challenges the statutory grounds, and she requests we apply a permissive exception to termination and establish a guardianship for the child. OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground authorizing termination. We decline to apply a permissive exception to termination or to establish a guardianship.
Filed Apr 24, 2024
View Opinion No. 24-0287
View Summary for Case No. 24-0287
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. She challenges the sufficiency of evidence supporting the grounds for termination and argues termination is contrary to the child’s best interests due to the closeness of the parent-child bond. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.
Filed Apr 24, 2024
View Opinion No. 24-0327
View Summary for Case No. 24-0327
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge. AFFIRMED. on both appeals. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, P.J. (9 pages)
A father and a mother each appeal the termination of their parental rights. The father challenges the statutory grounds and argues that termination is not in the children’s best interests. The mother also raises a best-interests claim, invokes the exception for a child over ten who objects to termination, and lobbies for a guardianship. OPINION HOLDS: Finding no merit to the parents’ claims, we affirm the order in both appeals.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 21-1893
View Summary for Case No. 21-1893
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Tabor and Greer, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, J. (17 pages)
A defendant appeals his convictions for attempted murder, intimidation with a dangerous weapon, and willful injury causing serious injury. He contests the weight of the evidence supporting his convictions. He also renews his hearsay objections to the admission of his phone conversation with his sister and the recorded statements of the severed defendants. In another evidentiary challenge, he urges that the district court abused its discretion in allowing expert testimony from a police detective. Lastly, he argues the court abused its discretion in failing to remove a crying juror. OPINION HOLDS: After a careful review of the defendant’s claims, we find no grounds to grant a new trial and affirm.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-0499
View Summary for Case No. 22-0499
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Amy M. Moore, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Bower, C.J. (8 pages)
Atiba Spellman appeals the grant of summary judgment and dismissal of his application for postconviction relief (PCR). Spellman contends the court should not have granted the State’s motion for summary judgment and dismiss his application for PCR and his PCR counsel was ineffective for failing to “timely depose trial counsel.” OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-0908
View Summary for Case No. 22-0908
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Kevin McKeever, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., Greer, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Greer, J. (4 pages)
A defendant appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction for failure to register as a sex offender, second or subsequent offense. OPINION HOLDS: Because the sentence imposed by the district court was the product of the parties’ agreement, the court did not need to provide additional reasons for the sentence. We affirm.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-1448
View Summary for Case No. 22-1448
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Potterfield, S.J. Opinion by Potterfield, S.J. (11 pages)
Stechcon appeals his convictions of willful injury causing bodily injury and false imprisonment, arguing (1) the district court should have granted his motion for mistrial after one of the State’s witnesses violated the court’s ruling on the motion in limine prohibiting witnesses from referencing that Stechcon had been in legal trouble before and “would spend seventeen more years locked up” and (2) the court erred in giving a jury instruction on general intent because it was not applicable to any of the charged offenses. OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for mistrial and any alleged error in providing the general-intent instruction was harmless. We affirm.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-1593
View Summary for Case No. 22-1593
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (8 pages)
Tommy Gene Collins appeals his convictions for sexual abuse in the second degree, sexual abuse in the third degree, and continuous sexual abuse of a child, arguing the district court improperly excluded evidence that he offered to be interviewed by law enforcement and that the district court should have required the State to provide specifics of the alleged acts supporting each charge. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded evidence that Collins offered to be interviewed by law enforcement, Collins did not present an issue for our review regarding his request for specificity, and Collins received a fair trial, we affirm.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-1734
View Summary for Case No. 22-1734
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Bower, C.J. (7 pages)
Tommy Quinn Jr. appeals his conviction of assault causing bodily injury, alleging his waiver of counsel was not knowing and intelligent as required under the Sixth Amendment. OPINION HOLDS: Because the court engaged in a meaningful colloquy with Quinn regarding his desire to waive counsel, we affirm.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-1847
View Summary for Case No. 22-1847
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, James S. Heckerman, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (14 pages)
Clinton Fichter appeals the economic provisions of the parties’ dissolution decree and Monica Fichter cross-appeals on the issue of spousal support. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decree on the issues of property division, child support, and spousal support. We eliminate the requirement on future modifications by Clinton concerning his income. And we deny Monica’s request for appellate attorney fees. Accordingly, we affirm the appeal as modified and affirm on the cross-appeal.
Filed Apr 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 22-1864
View Summary for Case No. 22-1864
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (8 pages)
The defendant challenges the admission of prior-bad-acts evidence in his trial for domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury. OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s admission of the prior-bad-acts evidence, we affirm.