2024 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her six-year-old son, A.C.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence, and termination is in A.C.’s best interests, so we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Steven Guiter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports terminating the mother’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024).  Because granting the mother additional time will not change the need for the child’s removal and termination is in the child’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Shawn Showers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (11 pages)

            The plaintiffs in a will contest appeal the orders directing the clerk of court to hold funds subject to an attorney’s lien until ownership is determined.  OPINION HOLDS: Because ownership of the funds is disputed, the court did not abuse its discretion by ordering the clerk of court to hold the funds in trust pending a legal determination of ownership or a valid release of the attorney’s lien.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (12 pages)

            Mark Fishler appeals his conviction for first-degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Fishler failed to preserve error on his Brady claim.  Because substantial evidence supports his conviction, juror bias did not deprive him of a fair trial by an impartial jury, and the greater weight of the credible evidence supports the jury’s verdict, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Stephen A. Owen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Buller, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J. (11 pages)

            Sharon Collins appeals her convictions on two counts of child endangerment and the sentences imposed.  As to the convictions, she argues the evidence was insufficient to support one of the alternative theories for guilt.  In relation to this challenge, she argues the savings statute for general verdicts—Iowa Code section 814.28 (2021)—is unconstitutional, and she is therefore entitled to a new trial.  As to the sentences, Sharon argues the “court impermissibly considered the [presentence investigation report’s] references to [her] difficulties with problem solving and decision-making as aggravating rather than mitigating factors.”  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the convictions as supported by substantial evidence.  As a result, we need not address the challenge to the constitutionality of Iowa Code section 814.28.  Finding no abuse of discretion in sentencing, we affirm the sentences imposed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Michael McPeek Jr. appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Because McPeek’s trial counsel did not breach any essential duty, nor was McPeek prejudiced by appellate counsel’s form-of-review error, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Shawn Showers, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            The plaintiffs in a will contest appeal the order approving the executor’s final report and closing the estate.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the claims the plaintiffs raise on appeal concern an earlier order of the probate court that was not appealed, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, DeDra Schroeder, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (23 pages)

            Douglas Arthur Hagenow appeals his convictions for sexual abuse, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the convictions and contending the district court abused its discretion when ruling on his pretrial motions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is sufficient evidence for the convictions and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Joel Dalrymple, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART, SENTENCES AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Partial dissent by Buller, J. (24 pages)

            Milton Bokemeyer appeals his convictions and sentences for drug and firearm offenses, claiming the State presented insufficient evidence that he possessed psilocybin, failed to affix drug tax stamps, or possessed a firearm.  Bokemeyer alternatively claims that the evidence only supports one conviction for possessing a firearm in violation of Iowa Code section 724.26 (2021).  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find there was insufficient evidence to support Bokemeyer’s convictions for possession of psilocybin and failure to affix dug tax stamps, we reverse these convictions.  Additionally, while we find sufficient evidence that Bokemeyer possessed a firearm, we agree that he could properly be convicted of only one violation of section 724.26, so we reverse one of his convictions under that statute.  This leaves Bokemeyer with convictions for possession of methamphetamine, manufacturing marijuana while in possession of a firearm, and one count of possession of a firearm under section 724.26.  Because the district court imposed consecutive sentences on two of Bokemeyer’s convictions—one of which we have reversed—we vacate the sentences on the remaining convictions and remand for resentencing.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I dissent in part because the video and photo evidence was sufficient to prove a tax-stamp violation for the methamphetamine.  I also disagree with the majority’s reliance on what I consider outdated and wrongly decided unpublished cases. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Gregory W. Steensland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Dennis Ruppe appeals his convictions for attempted murder, willful injury causing serious injury, assault while displaying a dangerous weapon, and criminal mischief.  OPINION HOLDS: We do not address Ruppe’s claim he received ineffective assistance of counsel while the court was polling the jury, as we do not address claims of ineffective assistance in a direct appeal.  Ruppe did not file a pretrial objection to the venue and this issue is therefore waived.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Ruppe’s motion for a new trial.  We affirm Ruppe’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (9 pages)

            The defendant appeals his convictions for second-degree sexual abuse, lascivious acts with a minor, and third-degree sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State’s expert witness did not impermissibly vouch for the credibility of the child victim and there was substantial evidence presented to support the convictions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey D. Bert, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Bower, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (17 pages)

            Denice Smith and her employer appeal from a medical malpractice verdict against them arising from her care of Fatima Belhak following an episiotomy performed during the birth of Belhak’s first child.  Smith seeks a new trial because of insufficient evidence of causation for one of the three specifications of negligence submitted to the jury and because of attorney misconduct during closing arguments and the rest of the trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Belhak’s expert witness did not testify that the size of suture was more likely than not a cause of Belhak’s injury, the suture specification should not have been submitted to the jury.  And Smith properly preserved error on this issue by moving for a directed verdict and raising it again in her posttrial motion for a new trial.  It matters not that she agreed to the jury instruction.  Smith is thus entitled to a new trial on this basis alone, and we need not address whether the conduct of Belhak’s counsel would also warrant a new trial.