2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother filed her notice of appeal four days late and has not shown the late filing was outside of her control, we deny her request for a delayed appeal and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to her child.  She argues that: (1) the State failed to prove a statutory ground for termination; (2) termination is not in the child’s best interest; (3) a permissive exception to termination should apply due to the closeness of the mother-child relationship; and (4) she should have been granted additional time to pursue reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother’s challenge to the statutory ground authorizing termination fails because both her trial testimony and appellate briefing acknowledge the child could not be returned to her custody at the time of the termination hearing.  In light of the mother’s history of alcohol abuse and untreated mental-health concerns, we affirm the juvenile court’s finding that termination is in the child’s best interests.  We also find the juvenile court properly declined to apply a permissive exception to termination and correctly denied the mother’s request for a six-month extension.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brendan Greiner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother and father each appeal the juvenile court’s termination of their respective parental rights.  The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights as to the son, D.C., and the daughter, C.W.-S., and the father’s parental rights as to the daughter.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer and Karen Kaufman Salic, Judges.  CONVICTIONS CONDITIONALLY AFFIRMED; SENTENCES VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument en banc.  Opinion by Greer, J.  Special concurrence by Buller, J.  Special concurrence by Langholz, J., Partial Dissent by Ahlers, J.  (31 pages)

            Jacob Cullum appeals the denial of his motion to suppress, the denial of his motion for new trial, and his sentence.  He argues the district court wrongly: (1) denied his motion to suppress because the officer who stopped him lacked reasonable suspicion, (2) denied his motion for new trial after applying the wrong standard, and (3) engaged in a fixed sentencing scheme or failed to realize it had the discretion to suspend the fines.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the officer had reasonable suspicion to initiate the traffic stop, we affirm the denial of his motion to suppress.  On his second claim, we agree the district court used the wrong standard when ruling on his motion for a new trial; we conditionally affirm his convictions but remand to the district court for application of the correct standard.  Finally, the district court failed to recognize and exercise its discretion to suspend the fines, so we vacate Cullum’s sentences.  If Cullum’s motion for new trial is denied and his convictions affirmed, he is to be resentenced.   SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in the judgment to vacate the fine, finding myself in part boxed in by existing supreme court precedent.   But I would encourage the elected branches to clarify by statute whether suspended fines may be imposed absent probation.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS:  As a matter of first principles of statutory interpretation, I agree 100% with the partial dissent’s thoughtful textual analysis of our sentencing statutes.  But even so, I reluctantly concur in the judgment to reverse and remand for resentencing on the fine because we do not get to follow those first principles when our supreme court has already rejected that precise interpretation in a materially identical statute.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because I believe the district court correctly determined that it could not suspend the fines without also placing the defendant on probation, and the court determined that probation was not appropriate in this case, the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing the defendant.  The defendant is not entitled to resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Inmate Michael Gordon initiated a civil suit claiming certain items of his personal property were improperly confiscated by prison officials and asking for the return of his property or “reimbursement” of $50,174.99.  The district court dismissed the lawsuit after Gordon failed to pay any amount of the filing fee; Gordon appeals the dismissal.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (17 pages)

            Christopher Moyle appeals his conviction and sentence for stalking, challenging the admission of evidence regarding his prior bad acts, the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, and the district court’s decision to impose a term of imprisonment.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the evidence of Moyle’s prior bad acts was properly admitted at trial.  His convictions against the same victim under similar circumstances were relevant to show his knowledge of the intimidating nature of the conduct charged in this case.  We find sufficient evidence to support each element of Moyle’s stalking conviction and detect no abuse of discretion in the district court’s sentence.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (11 pages)

            Loren Wilson appeals from his conviction and sentence for second-degree sexual abuse and lascivious acts with a child.  Wilson argues the district court erred in not reopening the record to allow him to testify and in denying him a new trial and that there is insufficient evidence to convict him of the charged crimes.  OPINION HOLDS: Because all the Teeters factors weigh against granting Wilson’s request to reopen the record and Wilson received a fair and impartial trial, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Wilson’s motion for new trial or his request to reopen the record.  And because sufficient evidence supported his convictions, we affirm the district court in all respects.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Roger L. Sailer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Midwest Builders’ Casualty Mutual Company and Iowa Trenchless, L.C. appeal the district court’s summary-judgment ruling dismissing their negligence suit against RP Constructors, LLC because they failed to comply with the requirements of Iowa Code section 85.22(2) (2022) to obtain the right of subrogation to maintain the suit.  OPINION HOLDS: Under nearly a century of supreme court precedent interpreting section 85.22(2) and its predecessors, workers’ compensation subrogation rights do not attach unless an employee is provided ninety days’ written notice.  That did not happen here.  Midwest Builders and Iowa Trenchless have failed to distinguish those controlling cases.  And we are not at liberty to overrule them.  So we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to RP Constructors.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Decatur County, Terry Rickers, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (15 pages)

            Julian Toney appeals the district court’s judgment finding that he slandered the title of Arthur and Hazel Parker and awarding punitive damages for this slander of title and a related trespass claim.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree that the slander-of-title claim fails.  Because Toney’s previous unaccepted offer to buy the land cannot be used as the salable value of the land and the Parkers offered no other evidence of that value, the Parkers failed to prove that they suffered special damages—a necessary element of slander of title.  And because the court granted punitive damages for both slander of title and trespass, we vacate that award and remand for the district court to decide the appropriate award for only the trespass claim.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because Toney was familiar with the land, made a written offer, and was fully available for examination at trial, I dissent from the majority’s holding that the district court erred when calculating special damages.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McClellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (12 pages)

            Following a jury trial, Salifou Sahr appeals his convictions.  Sahr challenges the admission of multiple pieces of evidence and argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support his convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the disputed evidence and the State presented sufficient evidence to support Sahr’s convictions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Carr, S.J.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Aaron Lee Stinde appeals from the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR), arguing his trial counsel was ineffective in the following ways: (1) failing “to ensure that the plea offer was properly communicated to [Stinde] and a recommendation made,” (2) permitting Stinde “to waive his right to trial by jury,” and (3) failing “to obtain and use the mental health and psychological records of the victim.”  OPINION HOLDS: Finding Stinde suffered no ineffective assistance of counsel, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of his PCR application. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Blake H. Norman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (15 pages)

            Jerod Miller appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, claiming the district court erred in finding that it was not bound by unanswered requests for admissions under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(2) and dismissing his claims for prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of Miller’s postconviction relief application.  The court correctly determined that it was not bound by the State’s defaulted admissions that defense counsel was ineffective.  We also agree with the court that Miller failed to prove his prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective-assistance claims.