March 2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wayne County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            Jesse Willey appeals a judgment and sentence following his written guilty plea to operating a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent.  OPINION HOLDS: We deny the State’s motion to dismiss, finding Willey has good cause to appeal.  But we reject Willey’s claimed errors and affirm the district court’s judgment and sentence.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because I would dismiss this frivolous guilty-plea appeal in compliance with Iowa Code section 814.6(1)(a)(3) (2023) rather than spend six pages to say we cannot provide relief, I dissent.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Ashley Sparks, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

Tiffany Dineen appeals her sentences following her guilty pleas.  She contends the district court abused its discretion by rejecting her request for a deferred judgment because (1) it used boilerplate language in giving its reasoning for her sentences and (2) it improperly considered only the nature of the offenses in reaching a sentencing determination.  OPINION HOLDS: Discerning no abuse of discretion, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Chad LaGrange appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (methamphetamine), arguing the sentencing court failed to consider mitigating factors and denied him the best opportunity for rehabilitation.  Additionally, LaGrange argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel claiming his counsel allowed him to plead guilty without establishing a sufficient factual basis.  OPINION FINDS: Because this court lacks authority to consider LaGrange’s ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal, we do not reach the merits.  The sentencing court did not abuse its discretion, so we affirm LaGrange’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (16 pages)

            Plaintiffs appeal a grant of summary judgment, arguing the settlement agreement underlying the district court order was unenforceable under the doctrine of mutual mistake.  Opinion holds: Because we conclude the district court properly determined plaintiffs bore the risk of a mistake by executing the agreement on behalf of Pudenz Farm Company, Inc. (PFC), PFC ratified the agreement, and the agreement was supported by adequate consideration, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Angela L. Doyle, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Justin Mines appeals the physical-care and spousal-support provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage with Michaella Kinyon-Mines.  He argues the court should have placed the children in his physical care rather than Michaella’s and that the four-year duration of the transitional-spousal-support award should be reduced.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving appropriate deference to the district court’s preferred position to assess the parties, we agree that the placement of the children in Michaella’s physical care is in their best interests.  But on his challenge to the spousal-support award, Justin is correct that the four-year award is inequitable.  Not only is it longer in duration than generally appropriate for transitional spousal support, but we see no basis in the record to extend the award beyond the thirteen months requested by Michaella in the district court.  And we thus affirm the decree as modified.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Collin Wesley Towlerton appeals the sentences imposed by the district court after pleading guilty.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing Towlerton, we affirm his sentences.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  On appeal, the mother contends that (1) one of the statutory grounds for termination was not established by clear and convincing evidence; (2) termination was not in the best interests of her children; (3) the juvenile court erred in not applying a permissive exception to termination; and (4) the juvenile court erred by not granting her a six-month extension to work toward reunification.  The father only contends termination was not in his child’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Michael Motto, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (14 pages)

            A father appeals the adjudication of his three daughters as children in need of assistance, claiming the district court “improperly admitted both documentary and testimonial evidence in contravention of the applicable rules of evidence regarding admissibility” and the adjudication is not supported by the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (10 pages)

            The attorney and guardian ad litem for the children and the State appeal the juvenile court order dismissing a petition to terminate parental rights and deferring permanency for six months.  OPINION HOLDS: Deferring to the juvenile court’s credibility findings on the close issue of the children’s best interests, we find the scales tip in favor of dismissing the petition.  We also reject the claim that the juvenile court erred by ordering a transition plan without considering the children’s safety and best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to four children.  She challenges the statutory grounds for termination and whether termination is in the children’s best interests.  She argues that we should apply a permissive exception to preclude termination and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The children could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying the only contested elements of statutory grounds for termination.  Termination is in the children’s best interests.  We decline to apply a permissive exception to termination or to give the mother additional time to work toward reunification.

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

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children, arguing that the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination, it is not in their best interests to terminate her rights, and the court should have applied a statutory exception to termination because of the parent-child bond and because the children are in the custody of their father.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review of the record, we find that the State proved the grounds for termination, it is in the children’s best interests to terminate the mother’s rights, and neither statutory exception applied to allow the court to forgo termination.  We affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik Howe, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A party appeals the juvenile court’s denial of her motion to intervene, arguing that she should have been permitted to intervene because of her relationship with the father and guardian of a half-sibling.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the court erroneously denied the motion to intervene as the party qualified as fictive kin, and following, had a legal interest in the outcome of the CINA custody arrangement.  We reverse the decision of the juvenile court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.