August 2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (11 pages)

            A jury found Coby Hemphill guilty of sexual abuse in the third degree and sexual exploitation of a minor; both crimes involved fifteen-year-old A.R.  Weeks later, the court learned that unadmitted evidence had been inadvertently sent back to the jury for its deliberation—eleven pages of screenshots purportedly showing messages sent by Hemphill that were never offered by the State but remained on a flash drive that held some of the State’s admitted exhibits.  Hemphill moved for new trial on the basis that the jury received any evidence, paper or document out of court not authorized by the court, which he asserted violated his constitutional right to a fair trial, among others.  The district court denied the motion for new trial, which Hemphill challenges on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: After applying the jury misconduct test test, we affirm the denial of Hemphill’s motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (11 pages)

            The State appeals the district court’s order restoring a petitioner’s firearm rights under Iowa Code section 724.31.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find that K.H. established by a preponderance of the evidence that he will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to the public safety and that restoration of his firearm rights would not be contrary to the public interest.  We therefore affirm the district court’s order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Robert Raveling appeals the decree dissolving his twenty-year marriage with Suzann Raveling.  He challenges the property division and the award of traditional spousal support.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree that it is equitable to equally divide the proceeds from the sale of the marital home.  While the home was indeed purchased in part with Robert’s inherited funds, the parties intended for the home to serve as their joint retirement nest egg, they resided in the home for nearly thirteen years, and Suzann contributed to the home’s substantial increase in value—keeping it well maintained and overseeing improvements.  We also agree that the traditional-spousal-support award is equitable given the parties’ twenty-year marriage, Suzann’s diminished income due to a disability she suffered during the marriage, and Robert’s greater financial position leaving the marriage.  And we award Suzann appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Daniel Kudron challenges the order granting summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the postconviction court did not clearly abuse its discretion by denying Kudron’s request to continue the hearing on the State’s motion for summary disposition, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            Jamaine Simmons appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and actual innocence.  OPINION HOLDS: Simmons failed to preserve error on his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim and did not carry his burden to show he is actually innocent.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            Dominick Marcott appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief from his conviction entered after a guilty plea.  He argues mainly that his trial counsel failed to advise him of possible constitutional problems with the possession sentencing enhancement under Iowa Code section 124.401(5) (2020).  OPINION HOLDS: Because Marcott has not shown any of his constitutional theories have merit, his counsel did not breach any essential duty by failing to pursue them.  Even if Marcott could identify a breach, he also failed to show that he would have rejected the beneficial plea agreement.  And while Marcott summarily asserts that two other attorneys also provided subpar representation, he did not adequately brief those issues on appeal, so we find the claims waived.  We thus affirm the denial of his application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Faheem Abdul Jabbar appeals the district court’s order denying his application for postconviction relief, arguing his defense counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to advise him that his Alford plea to an aggravated misdemeanor would not prevent the revocation of his parole from a prior sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Jabbar failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for his misunderstanding, he would have rejected the State’s offer and proceeded to trial.  Because Jabbar has not established the prejudice requirement of his ineffective-assistance claim, we affirm the district court’s denial of relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Crystal S. Cronk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral arguments by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Jeremy Dale Lawson appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, alleging his postconviction counsel was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find no structural error, we affirm the dismissal of Lawson’s postconviction relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR DISMISSAL IN PART.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Langholz, J.  (21 pages)

            Sheila Sundall appeals her convictions for introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility and possessing a controlled substance.  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for both convictions.  And she argues that the district court should have granted a new trial on the possession offense because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find substantial evidence does not support the introduction element of introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility, we reverse that conviction.  We find substantial evidence supports the possession charge and affirm that conviction.  And we find that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial as untimely.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Faithfully applying the governing supreme court precedents together, it follows that a person introduces a controlled substance into a detention facility in violation of Iowa Code section 719.8 (2022) when she is arrested carrying a bag concealing drugs, the arresting officer refuses her requests to abandon the bag and instead takes control of it and brings it along with the person into the facility, and the person chooses not to tell law enforcement of the drugs in the bag.  The jury could have found that Sundall did just that.  She was arrested carrying her bag concealing methamphetamine, unsuccessfully tried to get the officer to leave the bag on the side of the road rather than putting it in the front seat of the car that she knew was taking her to the jail, and still chose not to alert any officer that it contained methamphetamine. I would thus affirm both of Sundall’s convictions.  And so, I respectfully dissent from the part of the majority opinion reversing her conviction for introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, James N. Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (2 pages)

            Esteban Velazquez-Ramirez appeals the dismissal of his third application for postconviction relief.  He argues a new ground of law creates an exception to the statute of limitations governing his claim.  OPINION HOLDS: We have previously held that the case Velazquez-Ramirez relies on does not satisfy the “new ground of law” exception.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The Iowa Department of Revenue (the department) imposed a drug-tax assessment of $18,668.16 against Setra Sumerall; the department later initiated this garnishment action, seeking seized funds being held by the Iowa City Police Department.  Sumerall responded with a motion to quash and a motion to dismiss.  The district court denied Sumerall’s motions, concluding his success in a separate district court proceeding, which decided he had the right to the seized monies over the county attorney’s office, did not foreclose the department from taking possession of the funds.  And because Sumerall failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, the court found he could not challenge the validity of the drug-tax assessment in the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jesse Ramirez, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (6 pages)

Nicole Ruby pled guilty to assault causing bodily injury or mental illness after she deployed chemical spray at a resident in her building without justification.  The district court sentenced her to fourteen days in jail and provided notice Ruby lost her firearm rights.  Ruby appeals, arguing the district court abused its discretion in sentencing her to jail time and challenging the constitutionality of the firearm prohibition, which she contends was a term of her sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: The jail sentence imposed was not unreasonable.  While we agree that the firearm prohibition was a term of her sentence that can be addressed for the first time on direct appeal, we do not reach the merits of Ruby’s constitutional claim because she challenges the statute requiring the firearm prohibition notice, not the statutes that actually prohibit her from carrying dangerous weapons.