2025 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Cheryl Traum, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (7 pages)

            Ryan Pearson appeals his convictions after a conditional guilty plea, challenging the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress.  Pearson argues that he was unconstitutionally seized when an officer blocked in his vehicle early one morning after discovering Pearson passed out behind the wheel of his unlocked idling truck, with a handgun on the passenger seat, parked in a casino parking garage.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that the warrantless seizure was constitutional under the community-caretaking exception. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (3 pages)

            Preston Walls appeals the denial of his motion for new trial following his conviction for assault causing serious injury, basing his challenge on use of an allegedly defective jury instruction.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Walls failed to preserve error on the sole issue he raises on appeal, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

            A jury convicted Surfun Boens of first-degree murder.  Boens appeals, contending that the court abused its discretion in granting the State’s motion to strike a prospective juror for cause.  And he urges that the undeserved strike prejudiced him because the State gained disproportionate power to shape the jury’s composition—effectively exercising an extra peremptory challenge.  He asks that we reverse his conviction and remand for a new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: On this record, Boens has not established reversible error.  So, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Patrick H. Tott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            Following his conviction for possession of a controlled substance, third offense, Gatkek Lieth appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the trooper conducting the stop observed a violation of Iowa Code section 321.438(1) (2023), we find there was probable cause to initiate a traffic stop.  We accordingly uphold the district court’s suppression ruling and affirm Lieth’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Porter, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR DISMISSAL.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (16 pages)

            Stepchildren of a trust settlor appeal the denial of their motion to dismiss predeath claims by the settlor’s son.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the son’s interest in his mother’s trust is too speculative and contingent during her lifetime, he lacks standing to bring these claims before her death.  We reverse and remand for entry of an order dismissing his petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Katie Ranes, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            A protected person appeals the district court order establishing a limited guardianship for him and appointing his mother as his limited guardian.  He contends the evidence was insufficient to conclude that his decision-making capacity is so impaired that he is unable to care for his personal safety or provide necessities for himself.  Consequently, he argues the district court erred in establishing a limited guardianship for him.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude substantial evidence supports the district court’s finding that a limited guardianship was necessary, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  Dissent by Langholz, J.  (20 pages)

            Champion Contractors & Services-Commercial, LLC (Champion) brought suit against several defendants, claiming breach of contract.  Champion successfully sought default judgment against the defendants.  Later, the defendants moved to set aside the default and the default judgment, arguing Champion failed to file the notice of written intent to seek default at the time it served the defendants as required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.972(2).  The district court granted the defendants’ motions to set aside, which Champion appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: Using a strict application of rule 1.972, we affirm the district court’s ruling setting aside the default and the default judgments and remand for further proceedings.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because the defendants did not file a timely appeal of the default judgment or a timely posttrial motion to challenge Champion’s compliance with rule 1.972, the district court erred in setting aside that valid final judgment.  And defendant Ryan Burns’s personal-jurisdiction challenge to the judgment fails because he waived any objection to personal jurisdiction by failing to bring the challenge within a reasonable time.  I would thus reverse the district court’s order and remand for it to reinstate the final judgment against all the defendants.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Union County, Monty Franklin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights.  He argues the mother failed to establish a statutory ground for termination and did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: There is no dispute the father has been imprisoned for committing a crime against the child’s half-sibling, who lived in the same household.  This establishes a ground for termination under Iowa Code section 600A.8(9) (2023).  The father’s continued refusal to accept responsibility for that abuse, along with the child’s stated desire to have no contact with him, supports the juvenile court’s finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.  Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Virginia Cobb, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3) (2022).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother met her burden of showing the father abandoned the children and termination is in their best interests, we affirm the termination of his parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (17 pages)

            Three of George Struve’s children (collectively, Plaintiffs) appeal the denial of their claims that gifts of land to George’s son Perry and grandson Clayton were procured through undue influence.  Plaintiffs challenge the district court’s ruling that issue preclusion barred the parties from relitigating facts and holdings made in an earlier elder abuse case involving substantially the same parties and facts.  Plaintiffs also argue (1) Perry failed to rebut the presumption of undue influence that arose after the district court found a confidential relationship existed between George and Perry and (2) the district court erred in determining no confidential relationship existed between George and Clayton.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record confirms the district court allowed the parties to fully litigate all factual disputes and claims raised and disregarded the initial ruling on issue preclusion, Plaintiffs’ issue-preclusion challenge fails.  Upon review of the remaining challenges, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J. (10 pages)

            Kyle Bigbear was convicted of eluding while exceeding the speed limit by twenty-five miles per hour or more, a class “D” felony.  He stipulated to having at least two prior felony convictions, subjecting him to sentencing as a habitual offender.  On appeal, Bigbear challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress and argues that his stipulation to the habitual offender enhancement was involuntary and unintelligent.  OPINION HOLDS: Bigbear failed to preserve error on his challenge to the motion to suppress.  His stipulation to the habitual offender enhancement was not rendered involuntary or unintelligent by the district court’s failure to advise him of his eligibility for probation or that no fine could be imposed.  For these reasons, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Grundy County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            Nathan Stewart appeals from the district court’s partial decree dissolving his marriage with Angela Stewart, as well as its subsequent ruling on his motion to reconsider, enlarge, or amend.  Nathan contests the district court’s award of spousal support and vehicles to Angela, various marital property determinations and valuations, tax liability determination on a loan taken out by Nathan, property equalization amount and payment terms, and award to Angela of a post-secondary-education subsidy.  OPINION HOLDS: Although we agree with Nathan that the $200,000 tax loan is a marital liability, we decline to make Angela responsible for paying any portion of the tax loan.  We modify the postsecondary-education-subsidy portion of the decree to be consistent with Iowa Code sections 598.21F and 598.1(8) (2024).  We accordingly remand to the district court for entry of an order consistent with this opinion.  We affirm the district court’s decree in all other respects.