June 2024 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Kim M. Riley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions for eluding, driving while revoked, and leaving the scene of a personal-injury accident.  He alleges the prosecution—having more information about prospective jurors—enjoyed an unfair advantage during voir dire.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the defendant did not raise this issue until his motion for new trial, he failed to preserve error.  We thus affirm without reaching the merits of his allegation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Michael J. Schilling and Shawn Showers, Judges.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  Partial Dissent by Langholz, J.  (23 pages)

            Clint and Michelle Shalla appeal the district court decisions granting summary judgment and a directed verdict, denying extended discovery, and denying them a new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court correctly applied Iowa Code section 535.17 (2018) and the principles of vicarious liability to grant summary judgment and a directed verdict, and it did not abuse its discretion in denying extended discovery or a new trial, we affirm and remand for a determination of appellate attorney fees for County Bank.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: While I join much of the well-reasoned majority opinion, I cannot agree that the district court properly dismissed the tort claims against Chris Goerdt and Peoples Trust and Savings Bank based on Iowa Code section 535.17, a statute that makes certain agreements “not enforceable in contract law.”

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Badding, J., and Blane, S.J.  Opinion by Blane, S.J.  (18 pages)

            Austin Sims appeals the finding he committed second-degree sexual abuse and the admission of hearsay testimony and forensic recorded interviews under the residual hearsay exception in Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.807.  OPINION HOLDS: The trial court correctly found the video recorded forensic interviews were properly admissible under the residual hearsay exception and there was substantial evidence that Sims committed sex abuse to support the sexual violent predator determination and commitment.  Admission of other hearsay evidence, if erroneous, was harmless.  So we affirm the determination Sims committed sexual abuse. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, James M. Drew, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCES REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Badding, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Lee Carter appeals from his convictions, sentence, and judgment for false imprisonment and sexual abuse in the third degree following a jury trial.  Carter argues the charge of false imprisonment was not proper to submit as a lesser-included offense of the original charge of kidnapping in the first degree, the trial court erred in failing to grant a mistrial due to the admission of prior bad acts evidence, and the trial court inappropriately imposed a mixed sentence of both prison and jail.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Carter’s convictions; we reverse his sentences and remand for resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Jachina Hill appeals her convictions and sentences, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the finding she knowingly possessed the pills—a common element of counts I and II—and argues the court failed to provide adequate reasons on the record for the sentence imposed.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Hill’s convictions and sentences.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A postconviction applicant appeals the denial of relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject the structural-error claim and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Roger L. Sailer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Langholz, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Dwight Hearing appeals the district court’s ruling that he failed to establish a new boundary line by acquiescence between K&L Properties, LLC’s farmland and his residential property.  OPINION HOLDS: We review a boundary-by-acquiescence claim under Iowa Code chapter 650 for corrections of errors of law—not de novo.  And under this proper standard of review, substantial evidence supports the district court’s finding that Hearing failed to prove by clear evidence that prior owners of the farmland acquiesced to his alleged boundary line.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, Wyatt Peterson, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL. Considered by Tabor, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Joseph Hanson Jr. appeals his convictions following the denial of his motion to continue.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court abused its discretion when it denied the motion to continue, and Hanson established that injustice resulted.  We reverse and remand for new trial before a different judge.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher, Ahlers, Badding, and Buller, JJ.  Langholz, J., takes no part. Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (12 pages)

            The Estate of Kathleen Hazen and Steven Hazen (the Hazens) appeal the district court’s judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of Dr. William Olson on the Hazens’ medical malpractice action.  The Hazens claim the court erred in preventing them from impeaching Dr. Olson with evidence of prior professional disciplinary matters, instructing the jury on alternative methods of treatment, and engaging in “prejudicial misconduct during trial.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Buller, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Gamble, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Brandy Byrd appeals the denial of her third application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding Byrd has not established her sentence is grossly disproportionate to her crime, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (12 pages)

            Bridget Grady appeals the district court’s order on her petition to modify the decree dissolving her marriage to Brett Word, challenging the court’s denial of her request for physical care of the parties’ child.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Partial Dissent by Buller, J. (10 pages)

            A criminal defendant seeks discretionary review of a ruling on his motion in arrest of judgment and challenges the imposition of consecutive sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: We grant discretionary review of the district court’s ruling on the motion in arrest of judgment but affirm that ruling on the merits.  Finding no abuse of discretion in sentencing, we affirm the imposition of consecutive sentences.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because exercising our extraordinary jurisdiction to decide the guilty-plea issue is contrary to legislative intent, an abuse of the discretion granted to us by the elected branches, and a waste of judicial resources, I dissent from granting discretionary review.