2024 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (21 pages)

            Plaintiffs Brady Griffin, as executor of the Estate of Loren D. Griffin, and the Loren Douglas Griffin Irrevocable Living Trust by trustee, Curtis Griffin (collectively, Griffin) appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants NYLife Securities LLC, New York Life Insurance Company, and Marlyn McClain (collectively, NYLife) on Griffin’s claims of breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent non-disclosure, negligent misrepresentation/omission, constructive fraud, breach of contract, negligent supervision/respondeat superior, and punitive damages.  Griffin challenges the court’s application of the relevant statutes of limitations to bar several claims and contends the court erred in granting summary judgment on the remaining claims.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s order granting NYLife’s motion for summary judgment and dismissal of Griffin’s petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Stuart Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            Richard Eugene Noll appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled substance, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s ruling on the validity of the traffic stop but reverse and remand with directions to decide the lawfulness of the search of Noll’s person leading to the discovery of methamphetamine as outlined in this opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            A postconviction-relief (PCR) applicant appeals the denial of his motion for continuance and the subsequent dismissal of his PCR application, arguing the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for continuance and in finding that his trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to assert a justification defense.  OPINION HOLDS: We hold that the PCR applicant has not preserved error on his justification argument and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion for continuance. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

            Justin Wagoner appeals the denial of his request for class certification against his former employer.  And the employer, Shamrock Hills, appeals the court’s assumption in its ruling that a class action can be asserted as a counterclaim.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the class certification.  And we also reach that conclusion by assuming and not deciding that a class action can be asserted as a counterclaim.  Thus, we affirm the district court order. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Rose Anne Mefford (Trial) and Mark Kruse (Sentencing), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A criminal defendant claims insufficient evidence supported his conviction for operating while intoxicated.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the jury could reasonably consider the totality of the circumstances—the defendant was found passed out over the steering wheel, the vehicle was still in drive in the middle of the road, he smelled of alcohol, his speech was slurred, and his eyes were bloodshot—and conclude the defendant operated his vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, Tod Deck, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Neil Evans challenges the denial of his PCR application after he pled guilty to OWI, third offense.  Evans argued he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel, who failed to advise him that if he pled guilty he could not challenge the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress.  The State responds both that counsel did not have a duty to advise Evans and that Evans failed to establish he was prejudiced.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the Iowa Rules of Criminal Procedure fail to establish that counsel must inform accused of the forfeiture of the right to appeal a suppression ruling under prevailing standards of professional norms, we affirm the decision of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Mark T. Hostager, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (5 pages)

            Edgar Washington appeals his conviction for assault causing bodily injury, arguing the sentencing court abused its discretion by not giving enough weight to the mitigating factors he raised.  OPINION HOLDS: The court properly considered and weighed both mitigating and aggravating factors.  So, we affirm Washington’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, James N. Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals from a district court order requiring him to pay cash medical support.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father failed to request a transcript of the Iowa Code chapter 252H (2023) review hearing, and the transcript was necessary for a review on the merits, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel L. Block, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights, claiming that the statutory ground was not satisfied, and that termination is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Due to the mother’s domestically violent relationship with the children’s father, we hold the statutory ground was met and terminating the mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes not part.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two sons.  She argues that the State failed to prove grounds for termination, termination was not in her sons’ best interests, and that the juvenile court should have given her six more months to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved termination is warranted under paragraphs “f” and “h” of Iowa Code section 232.116(1) (2023).  And the mother’s substance use, both boys’ special needs, and their twenty-two months in foster care all show that the boys are best served by the consistency and finality of terminating the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children.  He contends termination is not in the children’s best interests, and he requests a guardianship and bridge order as an alternative to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court’s adjudication that her daughter is a child in need of assistance as defined in Iowa Code sections 232.96A(2), (3)(b), and (4) (2024) arguing that insufficient evidence supported the adjudication, her witnesses were more credible than the children, the district court considered impermissible hearsay, and the district court relied on “ex parte evidence.”  OPINION HOLDS: Because the evidence presented by the State was clear and convincing, we affirm.