2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Myron Gookin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (6 pages)

            Zachary Huber appeals from the district court’s determination that he is $22,077.56 in arrears of his child support obligation and its award of $1500 in attorney fees to his former wife.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly calculated Zachary’s child support deficiency and did not abuse its discretion when ordering him to pay a portion of his former wife’s attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Mitchell E. Turner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Matthias Boyd was found in contempt for violating a domestic abuse protective order.  He filed a postconviction-relief (PCR) application, which was dismissed on the grounds that contempt is not a “public offense” under Iowa Code § 822.2(1) (2023).  As a result, the court concluded that Boyd could not pursue PCR proceedings to challenge the contempt findings.  Boyd appeals, asserting that PCR trial counsel was ineffective for failing to argue that he was entitled to PCR proceedings under the Iowa Constitution.  OPINION HOLDS: Boyd failed to preserve error and the record is inadequate to evaluate his ineffective-assistance-of-PCR-counsel claim.  And, even if error had been preserved, Boyd loses on the merits, as contempt sanctions cannot be reviewed by a PCR action.  Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of his PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (9 pages)

            Timothy Hines appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, asserting claims of newly discovered evidence and actual innocence.  OPINION HOLDS: Hines failed to show the newly discovered witness testimony probably would have changed the result of the criminal trial, and we disagree with his assertion that no reasonable fact finder could convict him in light of all the evidence.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of Hines’s application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  Special Concurrence by Ahlers, J.  (11 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction, challenging the denial of his motion for new trial.  He alleges the district court failed to provide him notice and opportunity to be heard before denying his motion, contends the district court failed to provide adequate reasons for the denial, and claims the jury’s verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Because the district court failed to provide any analysis explaining why it denied the motion for new trial based on the weight of the evidence, I do not believe we can meaningfully assess whether the district court abused its discretion when it denied the motion; I think the best practice would be to remand for the district court to provide the necessary analysis.  However, because State v. Maxwell, 743 N.W.2d 185 (Iowa 2008) controls and permits the district court to provide no analysis when denying a motion for new trial based on the weight of the evidence, I concur.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (12 pages)

            Aaron Johnson appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and first-degree robbery.  He argues the prosecutor engaged in misconduct, and the district court erred in not providing his requested instruction on extortion.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no prosecutorial misconduct and agreeing that the extortion instruction should not have been given, we affirm the district court in all respects.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Terry Rickers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (4 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for eluding a pursuing law enforcement vehicle, alleging insufficient evidence supports the conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that the defendant willfully eluded a marked law enforcement vehicle after being given visual and audible signals to stop, we affirm.

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

            Following the suicide of her son, John Lefler, Rhonda Lemieux filed a lawsuit against his therapy provider, Next Step Counseling Services, Inc., and one of its therapists.  The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Next Step, finding that: (1) Next Step owed no duty to Lefler to prevent his suicide and (2) Lemieux failed to present sufficient evidence to establish that any breach of duty Next Step may have owed to Lefler caused his suicide.  Lemieux appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: Even assuming Next Step owed Lefler a duty and that Next Step breached it, the district court correctly found that Lemieux did not present sufficient evidence to establish that Next Step caused Lefler’s suicide.  As a result, she failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to causation.  We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Next Step.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Tyler Chandler appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, challenging the performance of his postconviction-relief counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Exercising our discretion to address Chandler’s newly asserted ineffective assistance claims, we find he has failed to show a breach of duty and prejudice on either of his claims.  We therefore affirm the district court’s order denying postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, John R. Flynn, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Badding, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Michael Zanoni appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) following his 2021 Alford guilty plea to possession with intent to deliver (methamphetamine), a class “C” felony.  Zanoni argues trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to (1) review video evidence before the suppression hearing and (2) properly advise him of the circumstances of his case when he decided to plead guilty.  OPINION HOLDS: Zanoni failed to prove his claims of ineffective assistance; we affirm the denial of his PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J. (14 pages)

            Kelley Tatum appeals his conviction for first-degree robbery, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction and claiming the district court erred in failing to order a competency hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Nicholas Haner appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief arguing that the sentence imposed amounts to cruel and unusual punishment because he was only twenty years old at the time of the crime and that his attorney was infective for “failing to request an opportunity to present evidence of the underdeveloped adolescent brain or evidence of brain damage from excessive use of drugs during his adolescence.”  OPINION HOLDS: Because Haner was not entitled to juvenile sentencing and has failed to provide an explanation for how he was prejudiced by his trial counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Buller, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Taevon Washington appeals the denial of postconviction relief from his two convictions for third-degree sexual abuse.  He argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at his criminal trial because his attorneys failed to challenge the incapacity element of third-degree sexual assault and that he is actually innocent.  OPINION HOLDS: Washington cannot relitigate the same ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim that we already considered and rejected on his direct appeal.  And he has failed to satisfy his demanding burden to prove his actual innocence.  We thus affirm with a memorandum opinion under Iowa Court Rule 21.26.