2024 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford and Shawn R. Showers, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (12 pages)

            Shatani Buck, Jr. was convicted of possession of marijuana after he produced a bag of marijuana while being transported to jail on an unrelated charge.  On appeal, Buck challenges whether evidence should have been suppressed because he was interrogated without a Miranda warning, whether the State proved he possessed marijuana, and whether the jury was correctly instructed on controlled marijuana versus hemp.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Buck was not interrogated, the district court properly denied his motion to suppress.  There was sufficient evidence for the jury to find the substance Buck had on his person was marijuana, a controlled substance.  Finally, the jury instruction properly stated the applicable law and the court was not required to include Buck’s proposed wording.  Accordingly, we affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Brad McCall, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            Co-executors of an estate appeal a district court order interpreting a provision in a will providing a beneficiary the opportunity to purchase real property from the estate.  OPINION HOLDS: The clear and unambiguous language of the will does not support the purchase price of the property sought by the co-executors, so we do not disturb the purchase price set by the district court.  However, the district court prematurely terminated the beneficiary’s rental obligation on the property prior to its purchase.  We vacate the portion of the district court’s order providing specific financing options for the beneficiary.  And we vacate the portion of the district court’s order holding the estate responsible for a portion of damages to the property.

            Certiorari from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Steven Van Marel, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (6 pages)

            The defendant to an extension of no contact order petitions for writ of certiorari, arguing the district court committed numerous errors in granting the extension.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the defendant has not preserved error on any of the issues raised in his petition, we annul the writ of certiorari.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Julie Walljasper appeals from a judgment finding her residential building abandoned and awarding title to the city under Iowa Code section 657A.10B (2021).  She challenges the abandonment finding, mainly arguing that she made enough improvements to avoid losing the property.  And she challenges an evidentiary ruling about the scope of her cross-examination of the city’s main witness.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, affording due weight to the district court’s factual findings, we agree that the evidence shows the house sits vacant, continues to deteriorate, and is unfit for human occupancy.  Walljasper indeed made some improvements.  But she only took meaningful steps after this petition was filed.  And those eleventh-hour fixes were not enough to abate the house’s dilapidated condition.  We thus find the house has been abandoned and the court properly awarded title to the city.  As for the evidentiary ruling, the district court reasonably limited the scope of Walljasper’s cross-examination, and she did not try to raise the issue herself during her direct testimony.  So we find no abuse of discretion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

            Eugene Frederick Wunschel, Jr appeals his sentence following an Alford plea, arguing the State breached the plea agreement in a related case so the judge who sentenced that case should have recused herself from his sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: The sentencing in the related case is not part of this record, but even if we assume the State breached the plea agreement, Fred cannot show an abuse of discretion in his sentencing.  He has not shown the district court harbored any bias stemming from an extrajudicial source.  We find no abuse of discretion and affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Russell Larson was convicted of two counts of sexual abuse in the second degree in 2021.  On appeal from the denial of his first postconviction-relief application, Larson argues he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel in several ways: (1) his attorney did not adequately communicate with him; (2) Larson’s attorney allowed him to waive his right to a jury trial without the waiver being knowing, intentional, and voluntary; (3) his attorney failed to review the video of his police interview with him; (4) his attorney failed to present medical evidence regarding a 2006 accident to his genitalia; and (5) his attorney did not adequately prepare for trial or cross-examine the witness.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that Larson’s claim of ineffective assistance from counsel is meritless based on the facts in the record.  We affirm the ruling of the trial court. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Margaret Reyes, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Joshua Dow appeals the district court’s order modifying the joint-physical-care provision of the parties’ dissolution decree to place their children in Ashley Herzberg’s physical care.  He argues that modification is not in the children’s best interests and that no substantial change in circumstances has occurred.  OPINION HOLDS: Giving the district court’s factual findings the deference they deserve, we agree that there has been a substantial change in circumstances not contemplated at the time of the decree and that placing the children in Herzberg’s physical care is in the children’s best interests.  And we deny Dow’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (6 pages)

            Esai Reno Filomeno Castillo appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to sexual exploitation of a minor, contending the court abused its discretion when sentencing him by failing to consider certain mitigating factors and improperly relying on others.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find no abuse of discretion, we affirm the sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J. (7 pages)

            A party appeals the imposition of three consecutive sentences, for a total of 20-years, on grounds that the trial court did not consider his mitigating circumstances.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the trial court included the defendant’s allocution in the determination of sentence, we affirm the sentence as imposed.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (3 pages)

            A defendant appeals the district court’s sentencing decision denying his request for a deferred judgment on a felony charge.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            Michaela Hale appeals an order modifying the physical-care provisions of the parties’ dissolution decree to place their children in the physical care of Steven Awe rather than in her care.  OPINION HOLDS: Hale’s 300-mile move from Estherville to Kirksville, Missouri, is a substantial change in circumstances.  And we agree with the district court that Awe has met his heavy burden to show that placing the children in his physical care is in the children’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  Both challenge the statutory grounds for termination.  They also claim termination is not in the children’s “best interests”—the mother by pointing to her bond with the children and the father by requesting additional time.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm on both appeals.