State of Iowa
v.
Daniel Anthony Lang
Appellee
State of Iowa
Appellant
Daniel Anthony Lang
Attorney for the Appellee
Sheryl Soich, Assistant Attorney General
Attorney for the Appellant
Jack Bjornstad
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered en banc without oral argument. Telleen, S.J., takes no part. Opinion by Buller, J. Sandy, J., specially concurs; Tabor, C.J., specially concurs with Schumacher, Ahlers, and Badding, JJ. joining. (25 pages)
A criminal defendant appeals his convictions on three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, and the State asks this court to overrule State v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 101 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). OPINION HOLDS: We expressly overrule Smith, finding this court misapplied the standards of appellate review. And we affirm Lang’s convictions as supported by substantial evidence. SANDY SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I write separately to clarify that I would narrow the scope of the majority’s reasoning in overruling Smith. TABOR SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I agree with the result reached by the main decision because the testimony of Z.S. provided substantial evidence to support the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. But I disagree with the extra step of overruling a three-decades-old outlier case. Overruling State v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 101 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993), is unnecessary to resolve Lang’s appeal. And doing so undermines the due-process review required by Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 316 (1979). Honoring the principle of judicial restraint, I would reject the State’s request to overrule Smith.
