2025 Archive | Most Recent Court of Appeals Summaries

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Lucy J. Gamon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (9 pages)

            An applicant for postconviction relief appeals the denial of his application, which sought relief from four second-degree sexual abuse convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant has not shown any ineffective assistance, nor has he shown he would have prevailed on his claim of purportedly newly discovered evidence, we affirm dismissal of his application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, Charles K. Borth and Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judges.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (16 pages)

            Timothy Griffin appeals his conviction for possession of methamphetamine, third or subsequent offense, as a habitual offender.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not make the necessary meaningful inquiry to determine whether Griffin knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to counsel, we cannot conclude that Griffin’s waiver of counsel was knowing and voluntary.  As a result, we must reverse and remand for a new trial.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I do not condone rewarding difficult defendants with a new trial, find no reversible error in this record, and believe the majority holding to be deeply fact-bound or a misapplication of controlling precedent.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Becky Goettsch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Alexander Bachman appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, third offense, challenging the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress his blood test results obtained by a warrant.  He argues that the officer invoked the implied-consent procedures of Iowa Code chapter 321J (2022) by offering him a preliminary breath screening test (“PBT”) and was thus exclusively required to follow the implied-consent procedures rather than seeking a warrant.  OPINION HOLDS: Neither the text of the statute nor precedent supports Bachman’s interpretation that the implied-consent procedures become mandatory merely because of offering a PBT.  Implied consent is invoked only when an officer requests a motor vehicle operator to submit to a chemical test of the operator’s blood, breath, or urine.  The officer never did that here—he got a warrant instead.  And that does not violate the statute.  We thus affirm the district court’s suppression ruling and Bachman’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Carr, S.J.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (4 pages)

            William Smith appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing the district court erred in denying his application due to ineffective assistance of counsel at his sentencing hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no breach of duty, we must affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Roger L. Sailer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, Chicchelly, Buller, JJ., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (12 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for second-degree sexual abuse, raising challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence and evidentiary challenges.  OPINION HOLDS: The defendant’s conviction is supported by sufficient evidence, and his evidentiary challenges fail.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Following a jury trial, Dustin Burns was convicted of numerous counts of sexual abuse.  He contends the district court abused its discretion in failing to grant his motion for new trial because his convictions are contrary to the weight of the evidence.  He also contends the district court abused its discretion because it improperly relied on Burns’ lack of remorse when imposing sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse by the district court on either point, we affirm Burns’ convictions and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Schumacher, Langholz, and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J. (23 pages)

            Eugene Love Jr. appeals his conviction of first-degree murder.  He argues the district court wrongly denied his Batson challenge and his subsequent motion for mistrial related to that claim.  Love also argues the court erred when it denied his motion to admit hearsay evidence about the victim under the rule of completeness.  Finally, Love contends the court abused its discretion when the court found his expert’s testimony to be irrelevant to the factual questions reserved for the jury.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Love’s conviction for first-degree murder.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, Rustin Davenport, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Tyrone Washington brings this certiorari action contesting the district court’s denial of his challenge to his restitution plan set by the Iowa Department of Corrections.  He argues he did not receive a pre-deprivation notice informing him of his restitution plan.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding Washington received a pre-deprivation notice, as well as copies of his restitution plans, and never objected to the same, we annul his writ. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (10 pages)

    Scott Brown appeals his convictions for sexual abuse in the second degree, challenging the introduction of evidence, improper sentencing considerations, and the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Joseph McCarville, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Aaron Paul Woodman appeals the sentences imposed by the district court after pleading guilty to two counts of forgery.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing him, we affirm Woodman’s sentences.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, DeDra Schroeder, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (5 pages)

    Corey Trott appeals the district court’s dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief as untimely.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.  
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J. (17 pages)

            Sherica Smiley challenges her convictions for two counts of possession of a controlled substance, one count each for methamphetamine and cannabis.  Smiley argues the district court improperly allowed use of her prior misdemeanor conviction to impeach; the jury verdict was not supported by substantial evidence; the district court applied the wrong standard when ruling on her motion for new trial and, alternatively, erred in denying a new trial; and the district court committed reversible error in imposing a fine on the possession-of-cannabis conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Smiley agreed to the district court reading a stipulation to the jury, error is unpreserved on the evidentiary issue.  Substantial evidence supported the jury verdict on both convictions.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Smiley’s motion for a new trial.  But as the State concedes, the record indicates the district court failed to properly exercise its discretion concerning the fine on the possession-of-cannabis conviction. So, we vacate that portion of the sentence imposed and remand for the limited purpose of resentencing on that count. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  VACATED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            A party appeals from a partition ruling following an heirs-property dispute.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not have the benefit of our relevant statutory interpretation on heirs property partitions, we vacate and remand for the court to reconsider in light of our decision in Muhr v. Willenborg, 6 N.W.3d 752 (Iowa Ct. App. 2024).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Michael Carpenter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            Maria Guadalupe Espinoza Sotelo appeals the district court’s grant of River Hills Community Health Center’s motion for summary judgment and denial of her motion to reconsider, arguing the district court erred in concluding that there were not disputed material facts relating to both her claims of negligence and negligent hiring, supervision, and retention against River Hills.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no errors of law, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (5 pages)

            Brittany Jo Ann Bailey appeals the sentences imposed by the district court after her convictions.  OPINION HOLDS:  Because the court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing her, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            Devin Waters appeals his conviction and sentence for domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury, in violation of Iowa Code section 708.2A(1) and 708.2A(2)(b) (2023).  He argues the State presented insufficient evidence to convict him, and the district court abused its discretion in denying his request for a deferred judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Since substantial evidence supports his conviction and the district court did not abuse its sentencing discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for ant County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (2 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Hatchett failed to preserve error on his claims, so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Kathleen A. Kilnoski, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the district court’s denial of his petition to modify the physical-care provisions of a custodial decree.  OPINION HOLDS: Although the father established a material change in circumstances, he failed to establish he is better suited to minister to the child’s needs than the child’s mother.  We affirm the district court’s decision to deny the father’s petition.  We award the mother appellate attorney fees and remand to the district court to determine the amount of the award not to exceed $6000.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica L. Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            Brian Brandel appeals the revocation of his deferred judgment and sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Brandel’s deferred judgment for first-degree fraudulent practices and imposing a prison sentence after the court found that Brandel had “outright lied” about a pecuniary damages payment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Greg Milani, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, Chicchelly, Buller, and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            The State appeals the district court’s ruling on Kyle Anthony Sadler’s application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Sadler failed to establish his trial counsel was ineffective, we reverse the order granting postconviction relief and remand to the district court for dismissal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (12 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court’s modification order placing the parties’ child in the father’s physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that stability and continuity favor the child’s placement with her father in Iowa, where she will remain in a familiar environment surrounded by multiple caregivers.  We therefore affirm the district court’s physical care decision.  We decline to award attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Michael Carpenter, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Lyle Wells appeals the decree dissolving his marriage to Karol Wells.  The only question on appeal is whether Karol proved the existence of a common law marriage.  OPINION HOLDS: Because a preponderance of the evidence supports the existence of a common law marriage, we affirm the decree dissolving the marriage but remand to the district court to determine a reasonable award of appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, David W. Brooks, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the private termination of her parental rights to her son, arguing that termination is not in the son’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree that the father proved the son is best served by termination.  At the time of the hearing, the mother was incarcerated on two felony charges in Illinois, with no release date on the horizon.  What’s more, the mother offered only vague justifications for her years of disinterest in the son before her incarceration.  In the meantime, the son—now seven years old—has bonded with his stepmother and wishes for her to adopt him.  The son desires, and is entitled to, stability and permanency with his father and stepmother.  We thus affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

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

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination is in the child’s best interests, and an extension of time is not warranted.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find clear and convincing evidence that the child could not be safely returned to the mother at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying the statutory basis for termination.  We also find that the child’s best interests favor permanency outside the mother’s custody and that the record does not support a six-month extension in lieu of termination.  Accordingly, we affirm termination of parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (24 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the juvenile court order terminating their respective parental rights to their two minor children.  Although the mother and father appeal separately, they make identical arguments on appeal.  The mother and father contend that (1) several permissive exceptions to termination should have been applied; (2) an extension of time to work towards reunification should have been granted; (3) placing the children under the guardianship of their paternal grandparents was more appropriate than termination; and (4) the juvenile court erred by not bifurcating the role of the children’s guardian ad litem and attorney.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm with respect to both parents.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: Due to the mother’s ongoing domestically violent relationship, we hold the statutory ground was met.  The mother did not preserve error on her parent-child bond and additional time arguments, and even if error was preserved, we would deny both requests for lack of supporting evidence. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She challenges the statutory grounds for termination, argues termination is not in the child’s best interests, seeks application of a permissive exception to termination, and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination because the child could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody.  Termination is in the child’s best interests.  We decline to apply a permissive exception to termination or to grant the mother additional time to work toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Patrick McAvan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (12 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order adjudicating her two minor daughters as children in need of assistance and the subsequent dispositional order.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm.           

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to one of his children.  He challenges the grounds for termination, claims termination was not in the child’s best interests, and urges an exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (5 pages).

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find the father abandoned or deserted the children when he ceased all efforts to comply with the reunification plan and moved to Wisconsin.  And notwithstanding the father’s waiver of the issue, we agree with the juvenile court that termination of parental rights was in the children’s best interests.  We therefore affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Greg W. Steensland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (3 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State proved the defendant operated his motor vehicle while controlled substances—amphetamine and methamphetamine—were present in the defendant’s urine, substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Margaret Reyes, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Melissa Pedersen appeals her five-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to dependent adult abuse resulting in serious injury.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Pedersen to prison rather than suspending the sentence and imposing probation. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Mark R. Lawson and Melissa A. Anderson-Seeber, Judges.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J, and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (20 pages)

            A party appeals two orders by the district court: one declining to enforce a settlement agreement between the parties and one finding a fence a party erected “was a clear violation of the express easement that had been in existence since 1981.”  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude a settlement agreement was reached between the parties.  As such, we reverse and remand for the entry of an order of enforcement as to the settlement agreement.  And because the resolution of the settlement agreement issue is dispositive of the appeal, we do not address the claim concerning the enforcement of the easement.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, arguing the district court erroneously excluded evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when excluding evidence relating to the defendant’s prior history with a local police officer during trial, as that officer was not involved with this traffic stop, the evidence was not probative of any material issue, and the defendant was not prejudiced by its exclusion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (11 pages)

            Following a combined pre-trial hearing, the district court granted Zachary Yost’s motion to dismiss one count of continuous sexual abuse of a child in violation of Iowa Code section 709.23 (2021) because it found this count constituted a violation of the ex post facto clauses of the state and federal constitutions.  In the same ruling, the district court also denied the State’s motion to amend the trial information because it believed such an amendment violated Yost’s speedy indictment rights.  On appeal, the State contends the district court erred by finding that (1) Yost’s charge for continuous sexual abuse of a child amounted to an ex post facto violation; and (2) its proposed amendment violated Yost’s speedy indictment rights.  OPINION HOLDS: After our careful review of the record, we find the district court erred in dismissing count one.  Instead, the district court should have granted the State’s motion to amend the trial information.  The amendment was proper and did not violate Yost’s speedy indictment rights.  Additionally, the amendment effectively remedied ex post facto concerns. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Sean McPartland, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            Mazin Mohamedali appeals the summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief following revocation of his probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Mohamedali’s challenge to the probation-revocation court’s imposition of a new sentence, which was harsher than the suspended sentence he already received, amounts to an illegal sentence.  The probation-revocation court’s imposition of a new, harsher sentence was illegal.  We reverse and remand for entry of an order granting Mohamedali’s motion for summary judgment and an order striking the portion of the probation-revocation order imposing the mandatory minimum sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (13 pages)

Octavius Sallis appeals his conviction for homicide by vehicle by operating while intoxicated in violation of Iowa Code section 707.6A(1) (2023), challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the conviction.  Specifically, he asserts the evidence was insufficient to establish that (1) he was intoxicated while driving and (2) his intoxication caused the death of the victim.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude the jury’s verdict is supported by substantial evidence, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (14 pages)

            Charles Hasselmann appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief that alleged claims of ineffective assistance of defense counsel and actual innocence.  He also raises a new ineffective-assistance claim on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that defense counsel did not breach any essential duties, there is not clear and convincing evidence to support Hasselmann’s actual innocence claim, and there is not a sufficient record for us to review the new postconviction and appellate ineffective-assistance claim.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s decision denying Hasselmann’s application for postconviction relief.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Angela L. Doyle, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (7 pages)

    Lakendrick Mosley appeals his conviction for murder in the first degree, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (11 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions, arguing several improper statements warrant a new trial and insufficient evidence supports his child-endangerment convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mistrial motions because its curative instructions remedied any potential unfairness, and substantial evidence supports the defendant’s child-endangerment convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert (dismissal) and Scott D. Rosenberg (summary judgment), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Charles and Karen Buel appeal the district court’s dismissal of their negligence claims against Shane Schuler for untimely service and its grant of summary judgment on their underinsured-motorist claim against their insurer, Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Company, based on their inability to recover against Schuler.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree that the Buels have not shown good cause for failing to serve Schuler by the ninety-day deadline.  When resisting dismissal, the Buels offered only vague descriptions of efforts to serve Schuler, provided no concrete details about what investigative steps were taken or when, and could not explain significant gaps between attempts at service.  The Buels failed to preserve error on their argument that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on their claim against Nationwide.  None of their arguments on appeal were made to or considered by the district court.  So we cannot consider them for the first time on appeal.  We thus affirm the dismissal of the Buels’ suit.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Valerie L. Clay, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Dorian Parkinson II appeals the denial of postconviction relief from his convictions for domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury by strangulation, domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury, and interference with official acts.  He argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel from his defense counsel relating to his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that Parkinson has failed to prove that his counsel breached an essential duty.  We thus affirm with a memorandum opinion under Iowa Court Rule 21.26.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Joel D. Yates, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

            A landscaping company appeals from a declaratory judgment finding its insurance coverage for property damage and lost business income was voided by material misrepresentations.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we agree with the district court that the insured made a material misrepresentation about at least one claimed loss.  We therefore affirm the court’s ruling declaring the policy void.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (12 pages)

            A jury found Joseph Hill guilty of two counts of second-degree sexual abuse, four counts of child endangerment resulting in bodily injury, and one count of child endangerment.  Hill challenges his convictions on appeal, arguing (1) his motion for mistrial should have been granted after a witness from the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services testified about a “founded” child abuse assessment on the same allegations that were the basis for one of the criminal charges and (2) there is not substantial evidence supporting his convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: Due to Hill’s failure to comply with Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.903(2)(a)(8)(3), we do not consider his arguments about the sufficiency of the evidence.  Following our review, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hill’s motion for mistrial and affirm. 

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

            Buyers appeal the district court’s summary judgment order on a petition for recovery of real property.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the buyers demonstrated no material factual dispute as to the seller’s right to forfeiture of the real estate contract, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mitchell County, Elizabeth Batey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J. (9 pages)

            Following her conviction for possession of a controlled substance (marijuana), first offense, Carrisa Mensch challenges the denial of her motion to suppress evidence.  Mensch concedes the deputy who stopped her vehicle had probable cause for the stop; she argues her state and federal constitutional rights were violated when he unlawfully extended the duration of the seizure while engaging in a blended inquiry.  Mensch also challenges the search of her vehicle, arguing her admission there was marijuana inside cannot serve as the basis for the search because the statements occurred only after the traffic stop was illegally extended and her consent to search was not voluntarily given.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Deputy Steinberg did not unlawfully extend the stop and Mensch’s admission there was marijuana in the vehicle gave him probable cause to search under the automobile exception, we affirm the district court’s denial of Mensch’s motion to suppress.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Patrice Eichman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            Champ Thaxton challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for operating while intoxicated, second offense.  Thaxton does not dispute that he operated a vehicle, but he contends the evidence was insufficient to establish that he was “under the influence” of alcohol.  OPINION HOLDS: The State presented sufficient evidence to establish that Thaxton was under the influence of alcohol.  We reject Thaxton’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence and affirm his conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Becky Goettsch, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (4 pages)

            As part of a global plea agreement involving five cases, Tyler Goode pled guilty to domestic abuse assault causing injury in SRCR373877—the only case at issue in this appeal.  Goode argues he entered his guilty plea involuntarily and the prosecutor breached the plea agreement by not making the sentencing recommendations to which they agreed.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Goode did not file a motion in arrest of judgment and because his real complaint is with the sentence he received in AGCR376051, which is not properly before us, there is no potential we could provide Goode relief on either of his claims.  Therefore, Goode lacks good cause to bring this appeal.  We dismiss.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (14 pages)

    Summers’ Enterprise, Inc., sued Hudson Land Development, LLC, and Artesian Earthworks, LLC, to foreclose a mechanic’s lien against real estate that Hudson owned.  The district court entered judgment for Summers.  Hudson appeals, raising three claims: (1) Summers and Artesian did not enter an oral contract; (2) Iowa Code section 572.11 (2020) bars the mechanic’s lien against Hudson; and (3) all sums to which Artesian was entitled under its contract with Hudson were paid before Summers filed its mechanic’s lien.  On cross-appeal, Summers claims it has a right to interest on the judgment at a rate of two percent per month.  Summers also seeks appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: On the first claim, we decline to reach the merits because Hudson failed to preserve error.  On Hudson’s remaining claims, we reach the same conclusions as the district court.  Thus, we affirm the judgment foreclosing the mechanic’s lien.  We also deny Summers’s cross-appeal claim.  Finally, we remand for the district court to order Hudson to pay Summers’s reasonable appellate attorney fees.
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John M. Wright, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

    Trevor Johnston appeals his convictions for first-degree theft and forgery relating to the sale of real property.  Citing testimony from his expert witness on forensic document examination, Johnston claims his convictions are not supported by sufficient evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: The jury was free to reject the opinion of the expert witness and instead believe the victim’s testimony.  The victim’s testimony established the necessary elements of both offenses, so we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John M. Wright, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J. (6 pages)

            Trevor Johnston challenges the evidence supporting his conviction for first-degree theft.  OPINION HOLDS: Following our review of the evidence, we conclude that Johnston’s conviction is supported by sufficient evidence.

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

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for third-degree sexual abuse, attempted second-degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: Having concluded the jury’s verdicts were supported by substantial record evidence, we affirm all three convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his discretionary sentence, claiming the prosecutor breached the plea agreement at a multi-case sentencing hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the prosecutor did not breach the plea agreement and Dotson agreed to a multi-case sentencing hearing, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Sandy, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (5 pages)

A defendant appeals his convictions for willful injury and domestic abuse assault, arguing he was entitled to a pre-trial determination of his claim to immunity under Iowa Code section 704.13 (Supp. 2017).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court was not required to resolve Thompson’s immunity claim prior to trial, we find no legal error mandating reversal in this case.  

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

            Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s decisions to exclude their expert witness from testifying and to deny their motion for new trial based on the exclusion of the expert in this legal malpractice case.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded the expert witness’s testimony and denied the motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Stacie Ritchie, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (6 pages)

            The ME-DE Irrevocable Land Trust, through its trustee Michael Erwin, appeals from the district court’s determination that it breached a real estate auction contract.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that substantial evidence supports the district court’s determination that the land trust repudiated the contract.  We affirm and remand for a determination of reasonable appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, John M. Sandy, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ. Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

            Billy Oyadare appeals from the district court’s property distribution award in the decree dissolving his marriage to Sarah Oyadare.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that the district court’s property division is equitable, there was no dissipation of marital assets, and the court did not abuse its discretion in awarding Sarah trial attorney fees.  We award Sarah appellate attorney fees and remand to the district court to determine the amount that should be awarded. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Roger L. Sailer, Tod Deck, and Jeffrey A. Neary, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions following conditional guilty pleas in two separate cases contending his charges should have been dismissed for failing to meet the speedy-trial requirements of Iowa’s Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA).  OPINION HOLDS: The defendant failed to preserve error in one of his cases.  In the other case, the defendant failed to comply with the notice requirements of the IADA to trigger the IADA’s 180-day disposition deadline, so the district court correctly denied his motion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            Monique Rodriguez-Flores and Jaymes Flores appeal the dismissal of their tort lawsuit against the City of Des Moines arising from Rodriguez-Flores’s slip and fall while walking on a road in a city cemetery after a snowfall.  They argue that the district court improperly granted summary judgment to the City based on the immunity in Iowa Code section 668.10(1)(b) (2021) because a material fact dispute existed about whether the City was following its snow-and-ice-removal policy for roads.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly granted summary judgment because it is undisputed that the city began its snow and ice removal in the cemetery within twelve hours of the snowfall’s end as required by its policy.  The other potential factual disputes argued on appeal are not material to compliance with this policy or not preserved because they were not decided by the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (10 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions for attempted murder and willful injury causing serious injury.  On appeal, he challenges two of the trial court’s evidentiary rulings and asserts that insufficient evidence exists to support the convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: We discern no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s evidentiary rulings.  And this record contains sufficient evidence to support the convictions challenged on appeal.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Jason and Teresa Zilk appeal the dismissal of their appeal to the district court of the compensation commission’s appraisement of damages awarded in a condemnation proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the district court’s finding that the Zilks failed to substantially comply with the statutory notice provisions or show good cause for failing to do so, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Christopher Kemp, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Tyrone Bryson appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief from his 1999 convictions and the sanctions imposed by the court.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the district court’s determination that Bryson’s claim is frivolous, and the court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a penalty for loss of thirty days earned time credit.  Bryson failed to preserve error on his claim that the district court improperly took judicial notice of outside pleadings.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (12 pages)

            Shelly Sholley appeals the district court’s ruling dismissing her petition to vacate an in rem judgment received by Newrez LLC—doing business as Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing (Shellpoint).  On appeal, she argues the district court improperly dismissed her petition to vacate due to her failure to serve Shellpoint with original notice—signed by the clerk and under the seal of the court—in a timely manner.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court did not err by dismissing Sholley’s petition to vacate for failure to serve original notice within the timeframe prescribed by our rules of civil procedure, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Christopher Kemp, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (16 pages)

            John Mordini appeals the decree dissolving his marriage to Nichole (Nikki) Miras Mordini.  He argues (1) he should have been awarded traditional spousal support because the parties were married more than twenty years and have a large discrepancy in annual income; (2) he should be awarded half the value of Nikki’s retirement accounts; (3) debts he incurred in the lead-up to the dissolution trial should have been considered marital and divided between the two parties; and (4) “errors of law at trial and bias by the [district court] evidenced in the . . . decree of dissolution of marriage violated his due process rights and prevented him from receiving an equitable proceeding.”  Nikki asks that we affirm the dissolution decree and award her $15,000 in appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: First, we deny Nikki’s motion to strike portions of John’s appellate brief.  Following our review of the dissolution proceedings, we affirm the district court’s decree and decline award appellate attorneys.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (4 pages)

    After pleading guilty to possession of marijuana, third offense, Billy Bishop asked the district court to suspend his indeterminate five-year prison sentence.  The court declined, finding that incarceration was the “appropriate rehabilitative plan” for Bishop and the better choice to protect the public.  On appeal, Bishop contends that sentence was an abuse of discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the district court properly weighed its sentencing options, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his discretionary sentence following a guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion by the sentencing court, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Rose Anne Mefford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (6 pages)

            Morgan Varner appeals her conviction and sentence for assault causing bodily injury.  She argues that the State failed to prove her use of force was not justified and that the district court abused its sentencing discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the jury verdict.  And the district court did not abuse its discretion by considering an improper factor or following a fixed sentencing policy.  We thus affirm Varner’s conviction and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Stacy Ritchie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court’s order removing her as co-guardian to her adult son with disabilities.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Henry County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            Rubey Lawn Care, LLC appeals the judgment awarding damages to Access Energy Cooperative and Lomont Molding, LLC for damages its alleged negligence caused to an electrical transformer.  OPINION HOLDS: Because a reasonable person could find it more likely than not that Rubey Lawn Care damaged the transformer, we affirm the judgment.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Wyatt Peterson, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (16 pages)

    Jonathan Critser appeals the grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) on his claim of wrongful termination in violation of public policy when he applied for unemployment benefits after calling in sick.  He also challenges the jury instructions.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the verdict was not supported by substantial evidence that Critser engaged in protected conduct, according to the definition of protected conduct given to the jury.  So we affirm the JNOV.  But we find the definition given to the jury was erroneous and reverse the district court’s ruling on the jury instructions.  We remand for a new trial using a corrected definition of protected conduct.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Mark T. Hostager, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Evan Shelton appeals, arguing the State breached his plea agreement by attempting to discuss alternative plea negotiations during sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the terms of the plea agreement did not mandate the State recommend a sentence, we find the State abided by the spirit of the plea agreement.  We affirm the sentence as imposed. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (4 pages)

            David Wetzel appeals his conviction for reckless use of fire or explosives, challenging the voluntariness of his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Wetzel failed to establish good cause, we dismiss his appeal.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            The Coateses and the Brehms entered into an arrangement for the sale of a parcel of land.  The Coateses submitted a written offer to purchase for $1,500,000.  But, the Brehms argue an escalation clause in the addendum to the purchase contract applied, setting the purchase price at $1,700,000.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the summary judgment ruling in favor of the Coateses; the district court should have found the parties agreed to a purchase price of $1,700,000.  We affirm the district court’s denial of the Coateses’ request for attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Ty Rogers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A juvenile appeals his delinquency adjudication, claiming there is not sufficient evidence to identify him as the perpetrator who slashed his classmate’s tires.  OPINION HOLDS: The State provided sufficient evidence establishing the juvenile was the perpetrator.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (12 pages)

            Britta Wood appeals the decree dissolving her marriage with Nick Wood, arguing that the district court should have placed their son in her physical care rather than in Nick’s physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving the district court’s well-reasoned and factually supported decision due deference, we agree that placing the parties’ son in Nick’s physical care is in the best interest of the son.  While we have considered the entire record and all the required factors in weighing this choice, like the district court, we find that most factors leave the parents at a relative draw except for one.  We agree with the court’s critical assessment that their son’s interest in having a relationship with both parents will be best served in Nick’s physical care, especially given Britta’s conduct showing an effort to alienate their son from Nick and his family while the dissolution was pending.  We thus affirm the decree.  And given the parties’ abilities to pay and the merits of the appeal, we grant Nick’s request for appellate attorney fees and remand for determination of a reasonable amount.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J. (14 pages)

            Traavon Thomas appeals his sentence following his guilty plea for first-degree robbery.  On appeal, Thomas claims the district court abused its discretion in imposing a seventeen-and-a-half-year mandatory minimum sentence.  Thomas argues the district court imposed a harsher sentence than was necessary to ensure his rehabilitation and protection of the public.  He also asserts the district court did not give proper consideration to numerous mitigating factors which weighed in favor of a reduced mandatory minimum sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm Thomas’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Steven J. Andreasen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (18 pages)

            Barbara Radke, the executor for the estate of Delores I. Todd, appeals a jury verdict finding Delores lacked testamentary capacity when she executed her 2010 will and that the will was the result of undue influence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient evidence was presented to submit the question of undue influence to the jury, the court did not err in admission of evidence or issuing jury instructions, and other claims are not preserved, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

    A Florida resident appeals the denial of her motion to vacate a default judgment on a financing agreement, arguing that she was not properly served and the forum-selection clause in the agreement was a contract of adhesion.  OPINION HOLDS: Because service was proper under Iowa Code section 617.3, and the court had personal jurisdiction over the defendant under the financing agreement, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Blake H. Norman, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            On appeal from the decree dissolving his marriage to Robyn Miculinich, Dalton Miculinich challenges the district court’s decision to place their two children in Robyn’s physical care rather than joint physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we determine it is in the children’s best interests to be placed in Robyn’s physical care.  We affirm and remand with instructions for the district court to enter an order on appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason Burns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            Brayton Reynolds appeals his sentences for two convictions of enticing a minor under the age of sixteen for a sexual purpose, arguing the district court abused its discretion in imposing concurrent five-year prison sentences rather than suspending the sentences and imposing probation.  He contends the court considered an improper factor, considered only one factor, and followed a fixed sentencing policy.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court’s consideration of his prior offense and shorthand reference to its sexual nature was not an improper factor.  Nor was that criminal history the only factor considered by the court—it also expressly relied on Reynolds’s “personal circumstances” and the “repulsive” nature of “the facts of this case.”  And nothing in the record—including the court’s unremarkable statement that it would not “tolerate[]” Reynolds’s illegal conduct—suggests the court’s selection of Reynolds’s specific sentence was based on any fixed policy.  We thus affirm the sentences imposed by the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (4 pages)

            A defendant appeals, challenging his sentence following his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when making its sentencing determination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Patrick D. Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals a dissolution decree placing the parties’ children in their joint physical care, claiming the district court should not have: (1) overlooked her role as the children’s primary caregiver; (2) disregarded the parties’ inability to communicate and agree on daily matters; (3) ignored the father’s domestic abuse assault of her while the dissolution was pending; and (4) based its physical-care decision on “perceived fairness to the parties.”  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s decision, finding upon our de novo review of the record that joint physical care is in the children’s best interests. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Duane E. Hoffmeyer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (5 pages)

    Jason Haire Jr. appeals his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals a custody-modification order.  She contests the district court finding a substantial change in circumstances, that the father was a superior caretaker, and the credibility findings underlying the court’s decision to place physical care with the father.  The father requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm and order the mother to pay $1000 of the father’s appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Elisabeth Reynoldson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            Judith Faria Briceno appeals the district court’s denial of her petition to modify the physical care provision of the decree dissolving her marriage to Edward Rojas Pena.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we conclude Judith failed to prove a substantial and material change in circumstances.  We affirm the denial of her modification petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ringgold County, Brad McCall, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (5 pages)

            Richard Hammond challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a domestic abuse protective order.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Joseph McCarville, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: As the district court correctly determined the father abandoned the child pursuant to section 600A.8(3)(b) and termination is in A.M.’s best interests, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dickinson County, David A. Lester, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A criminal defendant attempts to appeal following a guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the only error alleged was not preserved and the defendant did not establish good cause, we dismiss the attempted appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (16 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024), challenging each of the three steps in our termination framework.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we find the State failed to prove the statutory ground for termination because there was not clear and convincing evidence that the child could not “be returned to the custody of the child’s parents as provided in section 232.102.”  Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(f)(4).  We accordingly reverse the juvenile court’s ruling terminating the mother’s parental rights and remand for further proceedings.  

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (6 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their three-year-old son.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports the termination of the parents’ parental rights, termination of the parents’ parental rights is in the child’s best interest, and a guardianship is not the appropriate permanency option here. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (16 pages)

            A father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  Both the mother and father argue the juvenile court erred in finding a statutory basis for termination, the father continues to contest the juvenile court’s determination that termination was in the best interests of the child, the Department of Health and Human Services made reasonable efforts, and no permissive exception applies.  OPINION FINDS: Because we find the child could not have been returned to the care and custody of the child’s parents at the time of termination, termination is in the best interests of the child, the Department made reasonable efforts, and no permissive exception applies, we affirm the termination of parental rights.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father both appeal the termination of their parental rights to their sons, arguing that there is not clear and convincing evidence to support the ground for termination and that termination is not in the best interests of the sons.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court.  The State proved the statutory ground for terminating the mother and father’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024).  There is clear and convincing evidence that the sons could not be safely returned to the mother and father at the time of the termination hearing.  And termination of the parent’s parental rights is in the sons’ best interests given the parent’s failure to address the safety concerns of their home and still struggling with basic parenting skills.  We thus affirm on both appeals. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Michelle Jungers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her thirteen-year-old son.  OPINION HOLDS: Because of the mother’s ongoing mental-health struggles, we affirm the termination.  
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Elizabeth Batey, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the children could not have been returned to either parent’s custody at the time of termination, termination is in each child’s best interests, and no permissive exception applies.  We therefore affirm the termination of the mother and father’s respective parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Steven J. Holwerda, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A father and a child’s guardian ad litem (GAL) separately appeal the termination of the father’s parental rights, arguing that a guardianship with the maternal grandmother was in the child’s best interests.  The GAL also argues the juvenile court erred in denying a motion for continuance.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination of the father’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests and the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the GAL’s motion for continuance.  We affirm on both appeals. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Charles D. Fagan, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the juvenile court’s order terminating their respective parental rights to their three children.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established statutory grounds for termination with respect to both parents.  Termination of their respective parental rights is in the children’s best interests given that both parents present a safety risk to the children.  While both parents share bonds with the children, the detrimental effects of termination and the severing of those bonds do not outweigh their inability to meet the children’s needs, so we decline to apply a permissive exception to preserve either parents’ parental rights. 

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

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two-year-old son, contesting the statutory grounds for termination and requesting six more months to achieve reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: After carefully considering the record, we reach the same conclusions as the juvenile court and affirm the termination order.
 

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find that a guardianship is not in the child’s best interests and the mother’s permissive‑exception argument is waived, we affirm termination of her parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children, arguing that termination is not in their best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests.  The children have been out of their mother’s custody—and in their father’s—for over two years.  They need permanency and stability.  And it is not safe to return the children to the mother, who tried to hire a hitman to kill the father.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Adair County, Jordan Brackey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (4 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the incarcerated father’s parental rights to T.W., born in 2023, under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024).  On appeal, the father concedes the State proved the statutory ground for termination.  He argues termination of his rights is not in the child’s best interests and that guardianship with the maternal grandmother in lieu of termination is the best option for T.W., as it would allow her to have a positive relationship with her father while also providing her with the safety and stability she needs.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court; termination of the father’s parental rights is in T.W.’s best interests.  We affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination.  Termination is in the child’s best interests, and we do not apply a permissive exception to preclude termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Oscar and Maria Recio appeal the district court’s order enforcing a settlement agreement and dismissing their suit against Frederick Fridley, D.L. Peterson Trust, Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., and Doe Corporation.  They argue that the district court improperly granted summary judgment on the defendants’ motion to enforce a settlement agreement when a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether their attorney had authority to settle their claims.  OPINION HOLDS: The ruling that the Recios appeal is not a summary-judgment ruling.  Without objection from the Recios, the court decided this preliminary factual issue—finding based on the evidence before it that the parties reached a settlement agreement.  So any error in this procedure is not preserved.  And reviewing for corrections of errors at law, we hold that the court’s finding is supported by substantial evidence.  Given the other evidence and the presumption of attorney authority, we cannot say as a matter of law that the court was required to believe a single affidavit.  We thus affirm the district court’s order enforcing the settlement agreement and dismissing the Recios’ suit.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, MODIFIED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (13 pages)

            Gabrielle Gonzales appeals the decree establishing custody, physical care, visitation, and support of the child she shares with Miguel Zamora.  She challenges the grant of physical care to Miguel Zamora.  She also contests the requirement that she provide all transportation for visitation, the amount of child support, and the award of Miguel’s trial attorney fees.  Miguel requests an award of his appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Because E.Z.’s best interests are served by placing him in Miguel’s physical care, we affirm the physical caretaking provisions of the decree.  The costs of transporting the child for visitation should be shared by the parties, so we modify the decree to provide that each party is tasked with transporting E.Z. to the Quad Cities for exchanges at a mutually agreed upon place.  We remand to the district court to recalculate the child support consistent with this opinion.  Given the disparity in the parties’ earnings, we decline to award Miguel his trial attorney fees.  We reverse the district court on this issue.  Gabrielle prevailed on three of the four issues she raised on appeal.  For the same reasons stated in the preceding section, we decline to award Miguel his appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Adam Cart appeals the district court’s imposition of an agreed-upon sentence following his guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine, third offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Cart has failed to establish good cause to bring this appeal, we lack jurisdiction and must dismiss.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (17 pages)

            David Weltman appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  He claims that the PCR court abused its discretion when it did not admit certain exhibits and should have concluded that his criminal trial counsel provided him with ineffective assistance in a number of respects.  He argues that his criminal trial counsel’s ineffective assistance resulted in prejudice under each of his claims as well as cumulatively.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with Weltman that the PCR court abused its discretion when it did not admit the exhibits.  However, because the PCR court also ruled in the alternative, we need not reverse or remand for further proceedings.  Weltman failed to establish that his criminal trial counsel was ineffective in any respect.  As such he cannot establish any prejudice, cumulatively or otherwise.  We affirm the PCR court’s denial of Weltman’s PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Dustria A. Relph, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            Craig Naeve appeals from the decree dissolving his marriage to Tania Naeve.  He argues that the district court should not have considered the value of gifts he received from family when dividing the marital property between the parties.  Craig also challenges the district court’s determination that he dissipated assets.  Tania requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no inequity in the district court’s decision to treat the increase in value of assets Craig received as a gift, we agree with the district court’s decision to include that part of the value of the gifted property in the divisible marital property.  Craig dissipated assets by transferring $125,000 to his grandmother.  As to Tania’s request for appellate attorney fees, we deny her request.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Justin Lightfoot, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (12 pages)

            Richard Gardner appeals the property-division provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage with Jessica Gardner.  He argues that his $250,000 cash equalization payment to Jessica is inequitable because the district court inaccurately valued some of the property, improperly included proceeds from the sales of real estate and silver bars that he had already spent, and failed to divide his retirement accounts according to the formula from In re Marriage of Benson, 545 N.W.2d 252 (Iowa 1996), rather than awarding them all to him.  OPINION HOLDS: Most of Richard’s challenges come too late.  Because of his repeated failure to respond to discovery and comply with court orders, the district court found Richard in default.  Even so, the court permitted Richard to testify at the hearing to decide the proper relief for the decree.  And still, Richard did not contest most of the valuations, the inclusion of the proceeds, or the award of his undivided retirement accounts.  So any error on these issues is not preserved for our appellate review.  On the two factual issues that are arguably preserved—the valuation of the commercial real estate and the silver bars proceeds—we affirm the district court because the valuations are within the permissible range of evidence.  And based on the record before the district court, we agree that the property division and the $250,000 equalization payment is equitable.  We also grant Jessica’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (2 pages)

            Scott Campbell appeals the district court’s dismissal of his judicial review action.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we have no issues to review, we dismiss the appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Taylor County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (13 pages)

            Following his conviction for setting fire to his ex-wife’s home, Ellis Houk challenges the denial of his motion to strike two jurors for cause and the admission of cell tower evidence linking him to the scene of the fire.  OPINION HOLDS:  Because we find Houk cannot show sufficient prejudice to secure a new trial on his jury selection claim, and because he failed to preserve his evidentiary objection, we affirm his conviction and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Tamra Roberts, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (12 pages)

            A former spouse appeals from a dissolution decree, challenging its economic provisions and requesting appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decree on the merits and decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, Charles Borth, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals the district court order denying her breach-of-contract petition relating to real estate.  OPINION HOLDS: Because she attempted to modify the terms of the contract before communicating acceptance, the plaintiff rejected the offer and no contract was formed.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Henry Lamont Myles appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing the district court wrongly denied the application because (1) his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to explain the meaning of an “open” plea agreement to him and in failing to file a motion in arrest of judgment after it became clear that Myles misunderstood the plea agreement and (2) he is actually innocent of the charge of kidnapping in the third degree.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding Myles’s trial counsel was not ineffective and Myles failed to show clear and convincing evidence that he was factually innocent of false imprisonment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            Kerri Webber appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage to Jeffery Thoene.  Kerri challenges the district court’s decision to place the parties’ child in their joint physical care.  She argues it is in the child’s best interests to be placed in her physical care.  Both parties seek appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Joint physical care best serves the child’s interests.  We decline to award either party appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief, urging his trial lawyer was ineffective for allegedly failing to convey a plea offer, advising him not to attend depositions for strategic reasons, and using the terms “fired” and “felony stop” in closing argument.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the applicant has not proven breach of an essential duty or prejudice, and deferring to the credibility findings of the postconviction court, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, Tod Deck and Zachary Hindman, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (18 pages)

            A defendant found guilty of sexual abuse in the third degree appeals his conviction, challenging the (1) continuance of his case beyond the one-year speedy trial deadline, (2) denial of his motions for a mistrial and new trial after prospective jurors saw him in shackles, and (3) denial of his motion for substitute counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of the district court’s discretion on any of the claims of procedural error raised by Ellis.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; CROSS-APPEAL DISMISSED AS MOOT.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (21 pages)

            Brian Shock appeals, and Dr. Matthew Kettman and Fiat Family Medicine, P.L.L.C., cross-appeal, from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in a defamation lawsuit that Shock brought against Dr. Kettman and his medical clinic.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that the statements Dr. Kettman made about Shock to state and federal law enforcement officers are qualifiedly privileged.  Because the court correctly granted summary judgment to the defendants on that ground, their cross-appeal asserting alternative affirmative defenses is dismissed as moot. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A jury found Brian Woods guilty of interference with official acts with a dangerous weapon and carrying a weapon while under the influence.  On appeal, Woods argues (1) there is insufficient evidence that either of the two knives involved—a three-inch folding knife and a four-inch fixed blade knife—are a “dangerous weapon” and (2) the jury instruction defining dangerous weapon was incomplete.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err or abuse its discretion in refusing to give Woods’s requested “dangerous weapon” instruction and instead giving the model instruction.  And substantial evidence supports the jury’s determination that the knife in question was a dangerous weapon, so we affirm Woods’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Patrick H. Tott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J. (6 pages)

            Katrina Barnes appeals from her convictions for possession with intent to deliver, failure to affix a drug tax stamp, and two counts of child endangerment.  She challenges the denial of her motion to suppress, arguing a search warrant for two duplex units was not supported by probable cause.  OPINION HOLDS: The search warrant was supported by probable cause with respect to both duplex units, and the district court correctly denied the motion to suppress. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Alan Heavens, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief, challenging how his trial attorney handled alleged prior-false-allegations testimony under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.412.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the withdrawal of his Rule 5.412 motion at trial was an agreed-to strategic decision, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS TO ENTER NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (4 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for felon in possession of a firearm, arguing he was entitled to a necessity instruction because he claimed he was moving the gun from a table where children might access it.  And the parties stipulate to an error in the sentencing order.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no legal error in the district court’s denial of the necessity instruction and that a nunc pro tunc order is appropriate to address the sentencing issue, we affirm and remand with directions to enter a nunc pro tunc order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (4 pages)

            A postconviction-relief applicant appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, raising two claims.  OPINION HOLDS: The applicant failed to preserve error on his first claim because he did not present it to and secure a ruling from the district court.  As to the applicant’s second claim on appeal, he has not developed any cogent argument or presented any supporting authority.  As a result, the applicant forfeited his second claim.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            A father appeals from a ruling granting the mother’s petition to modify custody and physical care of their shared minor child.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the mother met her burden to prove modification of physical care and that the current visitation schedule is appropriate given the geographic distance of the parties, we affirm and decline to address the child‑support calculation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark Fowler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J. (7 pages)

            James Tate appeals his convictions following his conditional guilty pleas, challenging the denial of his motion to compel evidence involving a confidential informant.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Tate failed to preserve error on his challenge concerning the confidential informant and Tate has presented no legal authority to support his argument that the district court applied the wrong standard in the ruling on the motion to compel, as required by Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.903(2)(a)(8)(3), we do not reach the merits of his claim. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (3 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief claiming his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call the applicant as a witness.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant failed to meaningfully address structural error or the elements of an ineffective-assistance claim, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Quintin Clemons appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief claiming that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to move to suppress evidence seized in a warrantless search.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that Clemons failed to prove a breach of an essential duty because a motion to suppress the evidence would have been meritless.  The evidence was initially found in a lawful pat-down search.  And then it was not actually removed from his pocket and seized until later during a search incident to his arrest.  So we affirm the denial of Clemons’s application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Valerie L. Clay, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            David Hering appeals the district court’s ruling dismissing his petition for judicial review.  He claims the district court incorrectly determined that (1) it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the petition and (2) his petition failed to state claim upon which relief may be granted.  Additionally, he appeals the district court’s ruling denying his motion for sanctions against an attorney for the Iowa Department of Corrections.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Hering’s petition fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, we affirm.  We also find the district court did not commit an abuse of discretion by denying his motion for sanctions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (3 pages)

            Terrell Burton challenges the district court’s dismissal of his application for postconviction relief as untimely, urging us to consider his prior motions to correct an illegal sentence as timely PCR applications.  OPINION HOLDS: Because his motions to correct an illegal sentence were not PCR actions and his present PCR application is untimely, we affirm. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Kathleen A. Kilnoski, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

    Ryan McDonald pleaded guilty to second-degree murder.  In this appeal from the denial of postconviction relief, McDonald alleges that his plea counsel was ineffective in two ways: (1) by allowing him to plead guilty without a factual basis supporting the plea, and (2) by failing to provide him with additional minutes of testimony, rendering his guilty plea unknowing and involuntary.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm the denial of relief.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Ryan Allen appeals his sentence as imposed by the district court, after this court remanded for resentencing.  He makes four arguments on appeal, only one of which is preserved for review.  He argues the district court erred when it used a risk assessment that considered Allen’s unemployment before incarceration, as he is now employed in prison.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court exercised proper discretion in considering the risk assessment during sentencing and affirm the sentence imposed by the district court.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (4 pages)

            An inmate appeals the district court’s decision on judicial review to uphold denial of his release on parole, challenging the constitutionality of the Board of Parole’s “boilerplate” decision and the adequacy of the cited grounds for denial.  OPINION HOLDS:  We find no due process violation here.  And the seriousness of Yancey’s offense was a reasonable factor for the Board to consider in denying Yancey’s release.  Therefore, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (6 pages)

    Joshua Hubler appeals his prison sentence for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver, contending that the district court abused its discretion by imposing incarceration based on its “mistaken belief that [he] had received treatment” before in the community without any benefit.  OPINION HOLDS: Nothing in the record shows that Hubler had been offered or participated in substance-use treatment in the community.  Because the court’s incarceration decision was driven by its misreading of the record, we vacate Hubler’s sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Ashley Sparks, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (4 pages)

            J. Jesus Gonzalez Rodriguez appeals the district court’s order modifying the 2019 order establishing child support, arguing insufficient evidence supported the district court’s finding that his income is $107,297.24.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the district court’s order, finding that Jesus’s annual income is $79,586.50.  We affirm the order in all other respects and remand to the district court for recalculation of child support.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Tabitha Turner, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Buller, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Rochelle Ogden Sziber challenges the district court’s denial of her motion in arrest of judgment and request to withdraw her guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: Sziber does not have good cause for this appeal, and we decline to grant discretionary review.  So, we lack jurisdiction to reach the merits of her claim; we dismiss the appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, DeDra Schroeder, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Christian Vorland appeals his sentences for two counts of distributing drugs to a minor within 1000 feet of a school, three counts of third-degree sexual abuse, and one count of domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury or mental illness.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing consecutive sentences totaling eighty years in prison rather suspended sentences.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Davis County, Greg Milani, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Matthew Wettstein appeals his sentence as imposed by the district court, arguing the court relied on unproven or unprosecuted facts in victim impact statements when imposing sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Wettstein failed to make a showing of affirmative evidence the district court relied on unproven or unprosecuted facts, we affirm his sentence. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Howard County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (4 pages)

            The State appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of D.H.’s petition for relief from firearms disability.  The State argues dismissal without prejudice was improper because an evidentiary hearing on the petition’s merits was held and thus required the district court to deny the petition, which would subject D.H. to the statutory two-year time bar on refiling his petition.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we do not have jurisdiction to rule on the applicability of the statutory time bar and any remaining claim is moot, we dismiss the State’s appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Alan Heavens, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Amanda Gabel appeals the district court’s child‑custody determination, which placed the parties’ child in Brad Pieper’s physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Pieper having physical care is in the child’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wayne County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            Jesse Willey appeals a judgment and sentence following his written guilty plea to operating a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent.  OPINION HOLDS: We deny the State’s motion to dismiss, finding Willey has good cause to appeal.  But we reject Willey’s claimed errors and affirm the district court’s judgment and sentence.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because I would dismiss this frivolous guilty-plea appeal in compliance with Iowa Code section 814.6(1)(a)(3) (2023) rather than spend six pages to say we cannot provide relief, I dissent.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Ashley Sparks, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

Tiffany Dineen appeals her sentences following her guilty pleas.  She contends the district court abused its discretion by rejecting her request for a deferred judgment because (1) it used boilerplate language in giving its reasoning for her sentences and (2) it improperly considered only the nature of the offenses in reaching a sentencing determination.  OPINION HOLDS: Discerning no abuse of discretion, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Chad LaGrange appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (methamphetamine), arguing the sentencing court failed to consider mitigating factors and denied him the best opportunity for rehabilitation.  Additionally, LaGrange argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel claiming his counsel allowed him to plead guilty without establishing a sufficient factual basis.  OPINION FINDS: Because this court lacks authority to consider LaGrange’s ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal, we do not reach the merits.  The sentencing court did not abuse its discretion, so we affirm LaGrange’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (16 pages)

            Plaintiffs appeal a grant of summary judgment, arguing the settlement agreement underlying the district court order was unenforceable under the doctrine of mutual mistake.  Opinion holds: Because we conclude the district court properly determined plaintiffs bore the risk of a mistake by executing the agreement on behalf of Pudenz Farm Company, Inc. (PFC), PFC ratified the agreement, and the agreement was supported by adequate consideration, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Angela L. Doyle, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Justin Mines appeals the physical-care and spousal-support provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage with Michaella Kinyon-Mines.  He argues the court should have placed the children in his physical care rather than Michaella’s and that the four-year duration of the transitional-spousal-support award should be reduced.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving appropriate deference to the district court’s preferred position to assess the parties, we agree that the placement of the children in Michaella’s physical care is in their best interests.  But on his challenge to the spousal-support award, Justin is correct that the four-year award is inequitable.  Not only is it longer in duration than generally appropriate for transitional spousal support, but we see no basis in the record to extend the award beyond the thirteen months requested by Michaella in the district court.  And we thus affirm the decree as modified.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Collin Wesley Towlerton appeals the sentences imposed by the district court after pleading guilty.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing Towlerton, we affirm his sentences.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  On appeal, the mother contends that (1) one of the statutory grounds for termination was not established by clear and convincing evidence; (2) termination was not in the best interests of her children; (3) the juvenile court erred in not applying a permissive exception to termination; and (4) the juvenile court erred by not granting her a six-month extension to work toward reunification.  The father only contends termination was not in his child’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Michael Motto, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (14 pages)

            A father appeals the adjudication of his three daughters as children in need of assistance, claiming the district court “improperly admitted both documentary and testimonial evidence in contravention of the applicable rules of evidence regarding admissibility” and the adjudication is not supported by the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (10 pages)

            The attorney and guardian ad litem for the children and the State appeal the juvenile court order dismissing a petition to terminate parental rights and deferring permanency for six months.  OPINION HOLDS: Deferring to the juvenile court’s credibility findings on the close issue of the children’s best interests, we find the scales tip in favor of dismissing the petition.  We also reject the claim that the juvenile court erred by ordering a transition plan without considering the children’s safety and best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to four children.  She challenges the statutory grounds for termination and whether termination is in the children’s best interests.  She argues that we should apply a permissive exception to preclude termination and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The children could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying the only contested elements of statutory grounds for termination.  Termination is in the children’s best interests.  We decline to apply a permissive exception to termination or to give the mother additional time to work toward reunification.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children, arguing that the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination, it is not in their best interests to terminate her rights, and the court should have applied a statutory exception to termination because of the parent-child bond and because the children are in the custody of their father.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review of the record, we find that the State proved the grounds for termination, it is in the children’s best interests to terminate the mother’s rights, and neither statutory exception applied to allow the court to forgo termination.  We affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik Howe, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A party appeals the juvenile court’s denial of her motion to intervene, arguing that she should have been permitted to intervene because of her relationship with the father and guardian of a half-sibling.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the court erroneously denied the motion to intervene as the party qualified as fictive kin, and following, had a legal interest in the outcome of the CINA custody arrangement.  We reverse the decision of the juvenile court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Michelle Jungers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, contending that a six‑month extension should have been granted.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find that a six‑month extension is not warranted, we affirm termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument En Banc.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  The mother challenges the statutory ground authorizing termination and argues that the juvenile court should have established a guardianship rather than terminating her parental rights.  The father argues that termination of his parental rights is not in the child’s best interests and he should be given additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground to terminate the mother’s parental rights because the child could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody.  The mother did not preserve her guardianship argument because it was never raised before the juvenile court.  We disavow our prior cases that state the parent-child bond is not relevant to the best-interests analysis and conclude that the parent-child bond is a relevant consideration when determining what course of action is in the child’s best interests.  However, we conclude termination of the father’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  We do not grant the father any additional time to work toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the adjudicatory and dispositional orders in the child‑in‑need‑of‑assistance proceeding for his child, M.D.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is clear and convincing evidence to adjudicate M.D. as a child in need of assistance, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie Talkington, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son, arguing that termination is not in the son’s best interest and the bond exception should preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: The father was incarcerated for the first fifteen months of the son’s life.  The father’s refusal to continue participation in supervised visits, lack of any substance-use treatment, and regular use of marijuana since his release all show that the father cannot safely care for the son.  And while the father has some bond with the son, the son is also very much bonded with his cousin, who has cared for him since birth. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  Special Concurrence by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            The State appeals from the juvenile court’s order placing guardianship of the child with her foster parents, arguing: (1) the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to decide guardianship and custody issues due to a pending certiorari action before our court; (2) the juvenile court erred by failing to appoint Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as the child’s guardian and by applying other provisions of Iowa Code chapter 232 (2023) in appointing a guardian; and (3) public policy requires that courts strictly adhere to section 232.117(3).  OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court had jurisdiction to decide the guardianship issue but should have placed guardianship with HHS.  We modify the juvenile court’s guardianship order to place guardianship of the child with HHS and remand for entry of an order consistent with this opinion.  Because the State has prevailed in its primary argument, we decline to address its alternative public policy argument.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Based on the applicable statutes as they are written, I agree with the result reached by the majority.  But I write separately to highlight the concern I have with the current process, which requires harm to befall the child before the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services can be removed as guardian. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her one-year-old daughter.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights, as termination is in the best interests of the child, the application of a permissive exception is unwarranted, and the establishment of a guardianship in lieu of termination is not an appropriate permanency option for the child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s ruling terminating her parental rights to her minor son.  On appeal, the mother asserts only that the juvenile court erred by denying her request for an extension of time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (3 pages)

            Michael Lang appeals the summary dismissal of his ninth application for postconviction relief (PCR) after a jury found him guilty of first-degree kidnapping in 1988.  Lang’s sole argument on appeal is that because he raised a freestanding claim of actual innocence, the three-year statute of limitations does not apply to his application.  OPINION HOLDS: Because he failed to set forth any new ground of fact that could not have been discovered during the three-year window to file a timely PCR application, no exception applies.  The summary dismissal of Lang’s application was appropriate; we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (6 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his sentence for first-degree theft, assault causing bodily injury, and possession of a controlled substance.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not consider any unproven offenses when crafting the defendant’s sentence, nor did it abuse its discretion when imposing incarceration rather than probation, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (18 pages)

            Kathryn Jondle appeals from a split verdict in an undue-influence action challenging her mother’s will, trust, and inter vivos land transfer.  Jondle contends the district court erred when instructing the jury on the burden of proof applicable to her trust contest.  Margaret Gillespie cross-appeals, arguing the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s findings on Jondle’s successful claims.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the trust amendment at issue in Jondle’s appeal was of a testamentary nature, we conclude the district court did not err in rejecting the requested burden-shifting instruction.  As for Gillespie’s sufficiency challenge, we find substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict.  We therefore affirm on appeal and cross appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (23 pages)

            Thomas Jesse appeals his forty convictions for second-degree sexual abuse, challenging the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress.  He argues that the warrantless search of his room in his parents’ house and the warrantless seizure of his laptop found in that room violated the Fourth Amendment and article 1, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution.  He also argues that the warrants to continue to seize the laptop and search its electronic contents did not satisfy the particularity requirement of those constitutional provisions.  And he argues that the warrant authorizing the search of the entire residence lacks probable cause after excising the evidence obtained by these constitutional violations.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that Jesse’s state and federal constitutional rights were not violated.  The deputy’s warrantless search of Jesse’s bedroom was reasonable because his mother consented to it.  The short seizure of the laptop was also reasonable because it was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances.  The two warrants sufficiently described the laptop to satisfy the particularity requirement even though they contained typos in the laptop’s serial number.  And because Jesse’s challenge to the final warrant rests on the contrary assumptions that the search and seizure of the laptop were illegal, it fails too.  We thus affirm Jesse’s conviction.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (9 pages)

    A jury convicted Matthew Buford of two counts of first-degree murder and flight to avoid prosecution.  Buford challenges the district court’s admission of out-of-court statements by one of the victims over his hearsay objection.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding any hearsay violation harmless, we affirm Buford’s convictions.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, Chris Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A driver’s insurer appeals from a ruling on a petition for declaratory judgment disputing whether the vehicle’s insurer had a duty to defend the driver.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the driver’s guilty plea to operation without the owner’s consent has preclusive effect, the owner’s insurer had no duty to defend the driver in a subsequent civil suit.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (14 pages)

            Abigail Foster, now known as Abigail Fiedler, appeals from a dissolution decree, challenging the district court’s property division, spousal support award, and assessment of attorney and expert witness fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s property division as modified and decrease Abigail’s property settlement payment accordingly.  We deny Abigail’s request for a hybrid award of spousal support, affirm the district court’s assessment of trial attorney fees and denial of Abigail’s expert witness fees, and order each party to be responsible for their own appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Patrick Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Brendan McGuinness appeals the district court’s dismissal of his postconviction relief (PCR) application as untimely, arguing we should adopt equitable tolling.  OPINION HOLDS: Because equitable tolling does not apply under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2023) and, even it did, McGuinness has not shown that he otherwise diligently pursued his rights, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of his PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (17 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for first‑degree murder, challenging the denial of a Batson challenge, sufficiency of malice and intent evidence, and evidentiary rulings.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on all claims.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Kossuth County, John M. Sandy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            Christopher Weydert appeals the property provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Amber Weydert.  He claims that Amber dissipated marital assets, district court should not have awarded Amber a portion of land because the land was gifted to him, and the court over-valued a dividend.  OPINION HOLDS: Christopher failed to preserve error on his dissipation claim.  The particular facts of this case justified awarding Amber a portion of the land even though it was gifted to Christopher.  And the record supports the district court’s valuation of the dividend.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Nicholas L. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (13 pages)

    Robert Thompson appeals his convictions for operating while intoxicated, second offense, and carrying a dangerous weapon while under the influence.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Thompson’s convictions and sentence.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Patrick D. Smith, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ., but decided en banc.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Dissent by Greer, J.  (15 pages)

            Linda Betz filed suit against four employees of her previous workplace for defamation, claiming that statements made in internal documents and meetings harmed her reputation and led to her termination.  The district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss because the petition was filed after the two-year statute of limitations ran.  On appeal, Betz argues the district court erred in dismissing her suit.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the alleged defamatory statements were made internally, Betz would have had limited opportunity to become aware of them.  We conclude the discovery rule should be applied in this situation.  The question of when she became aware of the statements is a question of fact that must be determined to decide the statute of limitations.  We reverse the district court’s dismissal and remand the case for further proceedings as if the motion had been denied.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I do not think Betz’s case was dismissed prematurely.  Because she was on inquiry notice when she filed her November 2020 lawsuit, I would conclude her March 2023 defamation claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations and affirm the district court. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Clarence Tejan appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel relating to counsel’s failure to call character witnesses at sentencing and counsel’s “previous ethical violations.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey Bert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Ron Millbrook appeals the dismissal of his postconviction-relief petition, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective because counsel failed to impeach Vincent Harris, Millbrook’s own witness, with his prior inconsistent statements.  OPINION HOLDS: We find counsel’s decision not to impeach was a tactical one and did not constitute ineffective assistance. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, Patrick H. Tott, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Partial Dissent by Greer, P.J.  (21 pages)

           James Ellis appeals his conviction for willfully failing to appear.  He contends the evidence presented was insufficient to support his conviction and challenges the admission of a court order as an exhibit.  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, but the district court erroneously admitted as an exhibit the court order containing factual findings.  The admission was not harmless.  We reverse Ellis’s conviction and remand for a new trial.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: While I agree with the majority that Ellis’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge fails, I part ways on the evidentiary question.  I would conclude Ellis failed to preserve error on the specific hearsay objection the majority considers on appeal.  Even if the issue was preserved, I would rule the court order was admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule or, because the same evidence was admitted without objection, that any error was harmless.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

    After hearing evidence that Gayle Palmer fled police in a vehicle carrying drugs, a jury convicted him of felony eluding and possession of controlled substances.  Palmer appeals, contending that the State failed to prove the identity element for any of the offenses and failed to prove that he knowingly possessed marijuana or methamphetamine.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient evidence to support both the identification of Palmer as the fleeing driver and his constructive possession of the drugs found in the vehicle, we affirm.
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Bethany Currie and John J. Haney, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (17 pages)

    A jury convicted Aidan Ralph of third-degree sexual abuse and assault causing bodily injury.  Ralph claims that the district court erred by (1) admitting a portion of a police officer’s testimony over his objection that it improperly vouched for the victim’s credibility; and (2) admitting evidence that he physically abused the victim on prior occasions to establish his motive for sexually abusing her.  He requests that we reverse his sexual abuse conviction and remand for a new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding that the district court properly exercised its discretion in admitting the challenged evidence, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, DeDra Schroeder, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (10 pages)

            Green Belt Bank & Trust, a judgment creditor, appeals an order of garnishment entered by the district court against Unverferth Manufacturing Company, Inc., an employer of judgment debtor Mashon Van Mill.  Green Belt challenges the district court’s application of the garnishment exemption under Iowa Code section 642.21(1)(e) (2020) to determine Green Belt could recover “only ten percent of the total invoice value during the garnishment period.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Ashley Beisch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (11 pages)

            Pat Kepner appeals his convictions for indecent exposure, arguing the district court abused its discretion by excluding his eyewitness identification expert’s testimony.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court’s ruling on the admissibility of Kepner’s expert’s testimony was a reasonable exercise of judicial discretion, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Becky Goettsch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (4 pages)

            Tyler Goode appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea, arguing (1) the district court erred when it declined to follow the sentencing recommendation in the plea agreement and (2) the State’s absence at Goode’s sentencing hearing constitutes a failure to advocate for the sentencing recommendation and thus is a breach of the plea agreement.  Opinion Holds: Goode’s consent to the State’s absence waived his right to challenge such on appeal.  And because Goode failed to show the district court abused its discretion when it imposed a statutorily compliant sentence, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Jason D. Besler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (20 pages)

            After falling in her home, Joanne Jones was taken by ambulance to Mercy Medical Center, where she was treated by Dr. Jordan Imoehl.  Jones later brought a lawsuit against the medical center and doctor (collectively, Mercy), claiming professional negligence, infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, and res ipsa loquitur—all based on the theory that she was not timely diagnosed and treated for a stroke she suffered.  After Jones failed to file a certificate of merit, the district court dismissed each of Jones’s claims, concluding expert testimony was necessary for each so the lack of certificate of merit was fatal.  Jones appeals, challenging the dismissal of her claims for infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, and res ipsa loquitur.  OPINION HOLDS: Jones cannot evade the need for expert testimony and a certificate of merit through artful pleading.  Because expert testimony is necessary to establish each of Jones’s claims against Mercy, we affirm the dismissal of her lawsuit.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (17 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for second-degree murder, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, denial of a motion to suppress, an evidentiary issue regarding a rebuttal witness, and denial of his request for a non‑model jury instruction.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the preserved errors do not warrant reversal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Chris Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (3 pages)

            Owen Dejesus Jr. appeals the sentence imposed after he entered an Alford plea to one count of lascivious acts with a child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not abuse its sentencing discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Andrew Chappell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (8 pages).

            After Helena Dettmer tripped and fell on compacted ice and snow as she was crossing a City of Coralville street, she and her husband sued the city alleging negligence and statutory liability.  They appeal the grant of summary judgment in favor of the city, which concluded that the city is entitled to statutory immunity.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Dettmer tripped in the street and the city complied with its snow-removal policy, the city is entitled to statutory immunity under Iowa Code section 668.10(1)(b) (2023) and the district court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of the city.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clayton County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (3 pages)

            Thaddeus Dylan Usher appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after pleading guilty to stalking and first‑degree harassment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Usher failed to establish “good cause” to pursue an appeal, we must dismiss.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Charles Brown appeals the denial of postconviction relief from his convictions for intimidation with a dangerous weapon, willful injury causing serious injury, possession of a firearm as a felon, and interference with official acts while armed with a firearm.  Brown argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial because his counsel twice failed to object to the State calling a witness and failed to cross-examine the witness about allegedly inconsistent prior statements.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that Brown has failed to show that his counsel breached an essential duty and there is a reasonable probability the result of the proceeding would have been different if the witness had not testified.  We thus affirm with a memorandum opinion under Iowa Court Rule 21.26.    

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pocahontas County, Derek Johnson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (18 pages)

            Ferguson appeals his convictions of fifty timber violations and one count of theft in the second degree, arguing insufficient evidence existed on the record to show the trees at issue were cut within an appropriate date range and he possessed or appropriated the trees.  He also alleges he was operating under a mistake of fact.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence on the record to sustain his convictions.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Shengyi Ye appeals the decree dissolving his marriage with Zhenzhen Wang.  He challenges the district court’s restriction on his visitation rights requiring his parenting time to take place in the United States and its placement of the children in Zhenzhen’s sole legal custody.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm.  Because China is not a party to the Hague Convention, Zhenzhen would have no recourse should Shengyi refuse to return the children to the United States.  And Shengyi has already once unilaterally kept the children in China for more than half a year.  So the restriction on his visitation prohibiting international travel is justified and in the children’s best interests.  As for legal custody, the district court identified a host of factors that overcome the statutory presumption for joint legal custody, including Shengyi’s actions to prevent the children from leaving China, his significant geographic distance, his lack of active parenting, and his prior violence toward Zhenzhen.  We thus agree that sole legal custody best serves the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Williams appeals the denial of his post conviction relief application, arguing his counsel was ineffective for failure to call eight witnesses, which according to Williams, could have provided exculpatory information at trial.  OPINION HOLDS: We find counsel was not ineffective, as counsel either acted within the realm of reasonable trial strategy or Williams failed to show prejudice with witnesses that could have provided general observations.  Finally, we find that Williams failed to show his right to testify was not waived voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            Michael Bagby appeals the district court’s remand order entering judgment against First Street Deli II, LLC, Kimberly Harker, and Alexis Brown, and finding Bagby partially waived his right to collect late fees.  Bagby argues the district court (1) exceeded the scope of the remand, (2) erred by ruling on the issue of waiver, and (3) erred by finding a partial waiver.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s remand order in all respects.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Peter B. Newell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2023).  He argues that he did not abandon his children because a no-contact order prevented him from contacting the children’s mother and termination is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The father abandoned the children within the meaning of section 600A.8(3)(b), and termination is in the children’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karen A. Romano, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Meredith Majors appeals the judgment entered on an attorney fee lien that arose from the proceedings to dissolve her marriage.   OPINION HOLDS: Because orders for the division of property under Iowa Code section 598.21 (2024) are exempt from the homestead exemption, the court could enforce an attorney fee lien against those proceeds, which were held in trust following the sale of the marital home.  We decline to award appellate attorney fees.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M. Dreismeier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (11 pages)

    Jimmy Carr appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief following convictions for robbery, possessing a firearm as a felon, and interference with official acts.  He contends, first, counsel should have moved to sever the felon-in-possession charge or, at a minimum, sought a limiting instruction.  Second, counsel should have moved to suppress his statement that he needed the firearm to protect himself.  Third, he alleges cumulative error from counsel’s omissions.  And fourth, he contends the postconviction court erred in rejecting his belated claim that counsel was ineffective for not raising an intoxication defense.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the postconviction court’s thorough and well-reasoned analysis of Carr’s claims, we affirm the denial of relief.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            Siblings appeal from the denial of their petition for specific performance to compel the sale of real estate by their brother and his spouse.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the siblings were returned to the status quo before the petition was filed and therefore are owed no remedy.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to two children under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2022).  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence shows the father abandoned the children.  Although the father tries to blame his lack of contact with the children on external factors, we are unpersuaded.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Audubon County, Craig M. Dreismeier, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (17 pages)

            Alison Brinker appeals the district court decree dissolving her marriage with Jason Owen, arguing the district court (1) undervalued the Owen family acreage, (2) failed to value certain farm equipment separately from the Accu-Steel company valuation, (3) undervalued the Klocke and Klein farms, and (4) wrongly denied her spousal support.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s valuation of Accu-Steel.  We modify the district court’s denial of spousal support to Alison and determine that she shall be awarded $3500 in monthly traditional spousal support consistent with this opinion.  We affirm the district court in all other respects and remand for purposes of calculating child support.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            Windridge Implements, LLC appeals the district court’s ruling ordering it to pay unpaid contractual damages to BMO Harris Bank, N.A.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not err by enforcing the contractual obligation, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (17 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to M.S., born in 2021, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2023).  On appeal, the mother challenges the juvenile court’s conclusion the statutory ground was proved, arguing M.S. could have been returned to her custody at the time of the termination trial or, alternatively, that the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts at reunifying her with the child.  She also argues that the loss of her rights is not in the child’s best interests because of the bond the two share.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to M.S.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to L.S., born in 2019, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024).  On appeal, the mother challenges the juvenile court’s conclusion the statutory ground was proved, arguing L.S. could have been returned to her custody at the time of the termination trial or, alternatively, that the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts at reunifying her with the child.  She also argues that the loss of her rights is not in the child’s best interests because of the bond the two share.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to L.S.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the father’s parental rights to F.M., born in 2016; D.M., born in 2018; and S.M., born in 2018, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024).  On appeal, the father concedes the statutory ground for termination was proved.  He argues it is in the children’s best interests to give him six more months to work toward reunification with the children, who had been returned to the mother’s custody.  Alternatively, he asks us to apply the permissive factor in section 232.116(3)(a) to save the parent-child relationships.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we cannot conclude the need for removal would no longer exist in six months and decline to apply a permissive factor to save the parent-child relationships, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother has not shown she is able of meeting her children’s needs—particularly the substantial medical needs of one of the children—and termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding termination is in the child’s best interests and no permissive exception applies, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son under Iowa Code section 232.116(1), paragraphs (e) and (h) (2024), arguing (1) the grounds for termination were not supported by clear and convincing evidence, (2) the State did not make reasonable efforts for reunification, and (3) she should have been granted an additional six months to work towards reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother failed to preserve error on the reasonable‑efforts and relative‑custody‑exception claims, and since termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Susan Cole, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

    A father appeals the termination of parental rights to one child.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review of the record, we credit the views of the professionals in the case that, despite making efforts to gain parenting skills, the father lacks the ability to care for the child safely.  We affirm the juvenile court order.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of parental rights, arguing the juvenile court erred in finding a statutory basis for termination under sections 232.116(1)(f) and (g) (2024) and finding termination was in the best interest of the child.  If termination is proper, the father asks this court to apply a permissive exception.  OPINION FINDS: Because we find termination was proper under section 232.116(1)(f) and in the best interests of the child, we affirm the decision of the juvenile court.  We find a permissive exception does not apply. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, William Price, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, claiming termination is not in the child’s best interests, and arguing a permissive exception to termination applies.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Keokuk County, Crystal S. Cronk, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (22 pages)

            After being nearly involved in a head-on collision, which resulted in injuries to the driver of the other vehicle, Zachary Brain was investigated for driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.  Brain was later criminally charged, and he moved to suppress the evidence obtained through his interactions with officers and the result of the breath test.  The district court denied the motion to suppress, and Brain sought discretionary review of the ruling, which our supreme court granted before transferring the case to us.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of Brain’s motion to suppress and remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, Myron Gookin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages).

            Star Auto Company, Inc. (Star Auto) appeals from a breach-of-contract action wherein damages were awarded to Mosinski Enterprises, LLC (Mosinski) based on Star Auto’s failure to competently rebuild Mosinski’s truck engine.  Star Auto argues the district court erred by finding it repudiated the contract with Mosinski and in finding that Mosinski did not breach the warranty by altering the engine’s settings.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the finding that Star Auto’s repudiation was definite and unequivocal and that Mosinski did not breach the terms of the warranty prior to Star Auto’s repudiation.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s entry of judgment in favor of Mosinski.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark J. Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (12 pages)

            Active Thermal Concepts, Inc. and Active Holdings Group, Inc. appeal a summary-judgment ruling that they breached a contract with Labor Force, Inc. for temporary employees.  OPINION HOLDS: Active’s disputes over the form of Labor Force’s summary judgment filings lack merit—Labor Force’s motion was timely, it contained a statement of undisputed facts, and any failure by Labor Force to expressly specify which of Active’s facts it was disputing in resistance to Active’s competing motion did not require the court to grant Active’s motion.  So too do Active’s substantive arguments fail—the summary-judgment evidence showed the parties intended for the contract to include services to Active Holdings, Labor Force substantially performed its contractual duties to the extent possible, and Labor Force incurred damages from Active’s breach.  We thus affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Labor Force.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Michael Cone Sr., an applicant for postconviction relief (PCR), appeals the district court’s denial of his PCR application, arguing he (1) received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel and (2) is actually innocent.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding a lack of clear and convincing evidence of Cone’s actual innocence, and his trial counsel was not ineffective.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Fae Hoover Grinde, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Vance Barton appeals from various drug convictions.  On appeal, Barton argues the State committed prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments “by repeatedly stating a false narrative.”  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no prejudicial prosecutorial misconduct, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Robert D. Tiefenthaler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            Kimberly Tillman appeals the dismissal of her suit against Jason Hinson for lack of service.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly dismissed Tillman’s suit against Hinson without prejudice under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.302(5).  Sending the original notice by certified mail is not proper personal service under our rules.  Even if it were proper service, Hinson did not receive the original notice until after Tillman’s much-extended deadline for service.  And we cannot consider any of Tillman’s other arguments because they were not decided by—or for some, even raised to—the district court.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCES VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J. (9 pages)

    Sean Sheets challenges the district court’s admission of evidence of prior instances of abuse committed against the same children in a different county and the court’s failure to recognize it had discretion to consider risk assessment information in his presentence investigation report.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Sheets’s convictions, vacate his sentences, and remand for resentencing. 
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Heather Lauber, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (15 pages)

    Invoking the “silent witness” doctrine, the district court allowed the State to admit into evidence a police body camera recording of a surveillance video showing Terence Manning, Jr., punching and kicking another man in a convenience store parking lot.  After seeing that video, the jury convicted Manning of willful injury causing serious injury.  On appeal, Manning claims that the court should have excluded the video exhibit based on his authentication and best-evidence objections.  He also challenges the sufficiency of the State’s evidence that he specifically intended to inflict serious injury.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence of Manning’s specific intent.  But because the district court erred in admitting the surveillance video without proper authentication, and that error was not harmless, we reverse Manning’s conviction and remand for a new trial.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, James N. Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (11 pages)

            Tran Walker appeals the summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief.  He argues that he was entitled to a hearing and he presented questions of material fact regarding his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Tran was not entitled to a hearing.  He failed to present any questions of material fact regarding his ineffective-assistance claims.  The district court correctly granted the State’s motion for summary disposition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (14 pages)

            Richard Radloff appeals the district court’s findings, following a bench trial on his wage-claim petition, that he was not owed either a bi-annual bonus or mileage bonus from PTC Trucking, LLC.  Because wages were not withheld, the district court found he was not entitled to liquidated damages, court costs, or attorney’s fees.  PTC Trucking argues it was not Radloff’s employer.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the bonuses were discretionary, not “wages” under Iowa Code chapter 91A (2020), and affirm on this basis.  Because PTC Trucking failed to raise its claim that it was not Radloff’s employer to the district court, we conclude that argument is not preserved for our consideration as an alternative basis to affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, JJ., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A driver arrested after methamphetamine was discovered inside her borrowed vehicle challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her conviction for possession of a controlled substance.  OPINION HOLDS: Reviewing for legal error, we find the State presented just enough evidence to support a finding of constructive possession.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree, challenging the district court’s denial of a motion for mistrial.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we credit the district court’s advantaged position to assess prejudice when a witness mentioned the defendant’s “booking photo,” we find adequate record support for the court’s ruling and discern no abuse of discretion in denying the motion for mistrial.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, David C. Larson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (6 pages).

            A mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s decision, finding that the mother abandoned the child pursuant to Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2023).  Leaving the child with responsible individuals to shield the child from her drug addiction does not excuse the mother’s failure to maintain communication or contact with the child. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Amy Zacharias, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, P.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (18 pages)

            Plaintiffs appeal the district court decision granting summary judgment after finding Iowa Code section 686D.6 (2022) precluded their claim.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the grant of summary judgment.  DISSENT ASSERTS:  Because I believe that the Roses created a jury question on the recklessness of the nursing facility’s actions, I respectfully dissent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Dustria A. Relph, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals the dismissal of her petition to set aside a will.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on the undisputed facts deemed admitted under the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey D. Bert, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (29 pages)

            Austin Nelson appeals, and Kimberly Nelson cross-appeals, the decree dissolving their marriage.  Austin claims the district court erred in its award of sole legal custody of the parties’ two younger children to Kimberly, in its valuation of the parties’ closely held business, in its award of the business to Kimberly, and in its denial of his discovery requests of Kimberly’s work-related emails.  Kimberly claims the court erred by failing to award her retroactive child support, by failing to order Austin to provide a “new in box” iPhone for the two younger children, by failing to order Austin to reimburse her for the children’s expenses within thirty days, by declining to credit her for fifty percent of Austin’s “undisclosed” income, and by failing to order Austin to pay all expenses “required to complete the tax filings for 2022 forward.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm on appeal and affirm on cross-appeal. We decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Candelario Leon was charged with two counts of lascivious acts with a child.  The jury found him guilty on Count 2 and not guilty on Count 1.  Leon appeals claiming the verdicts are factually inconsistent.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no inconsistency between the verdicts and no merit to Leon’s arguments, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey D. Bert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (3 pages)

            Justin Mayo appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) from his conviction for second-degree theft.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Mayo raises a different argument on appeal than he raised in his PCR application, he failed to preserve error for our review.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Henry County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J. (6 pages)

            James Corron appeals from a conviction for delivery of less than five grams of methamphetamine as a habitual offender.  Corron contends that the district court improperly denied his mid-trial request for substitution of counsel because of a “complete breakdown in the attorney-client relationship,” giving rise to a “personal conflict of interest” with his defense counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.     

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, James N, Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  Special Concurrence by Carr, S.J.  (14 pages)

            A jury found Bret Meyer guilty of first-degree burglary, willful injury causing bodily injury, and going armed with intent.  On appeal, Meyer challenges the district court’s denial of his motion for mistrial based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments.  He also contends there is insufficient evidence to support his convictions, arguing there was not substantial evidence he was the person who invaded his ex-girlfriend’s home and stabbed her new boyfriend.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the jury’s determination that Meyer was the person who invaded Alisha’s home and stabbed her new boyfriend.  And we agree with the district court that Meyer failed to establish a due process violation based on prosecutorial misconduct.  We affirm the denial of Meyer’s motion for mistrial and his convictions.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I depart from the majority’s conclusion that the prosecutor committed no misconduct but would find that no prejudice resulted from the misconduct.  I therefore concur in the result.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Chris Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Tracy Buchholz appeals sentences imposed after he entered a guilty plea to two counts of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we determine Buchholz failed to affirmatively demonstrate the district court relied on impermissible sentencing factors when imposing a sentence that fell within the statutory limitations, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Humboldt County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Andrew Zinnel appeals the denial of his pre-answer motions to dismiss for untimely service.  OPINION HOLDS: As we conclude that good cause does not exist for failing to timely serve the defendant, we reverse and remand for the entry of an order granting Zinnel’s motions to dismiss. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            Nicholas Ford appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief.  On appeal, he asserts (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel because during the plea-bargaining process his counsel failed to investigate his case; and (2) he is actually innocent.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (14 pages)

            Health Enterprises of Iowa, a nonprofit corporation organized by Iowa hospitals, seeks judicial review of the Iowa Department of Revenue’s denial of tax refund claims.  Health Enterprises argues its members’ eligibility for tax exemptions under Iowa Code section 423.3(27) should “flow through” to Health Enterprises.  OPINION HOLDS: Reviewing for legal error, we find the statute unambiguously requires a taxpayer to be “a nonprofit hospital licensed pursuant to chapter 135B” to qualify for exemption under section 423.3(27).  We decline Health Enterprises’ invitation to resolve additional questions of fact not addressed by the Director or otherwise preserved for review.  The Director’s final order is affirmed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Celene Gogerty, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (14 pages)

            Octavio Lopez Sanchez appeals his sentences, arguing the district court abused its discretion by imposing consecutive sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel Dalrymple, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard by Schumacher, C.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (12 pages)

            The State appeals from the district court’s grant of postconviction relief to the petitioner.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, there is overwhelming evidence of Mathews’ guilt, and he cannot satisfy the prejudice prong of the Strickland test.  We remand for the district court to consider the remaining ineffective-assistance claims it did not previously address. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED TO DETERMINE ATTORNEY FEES.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals from a custody decree placing physical care of the child with the father and requests the monthly child support payment amount be modified.  The father seeks $3000 in appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father is better able to minister to the child’s wellbeing, provide more stability, and is more likely to support the child’s relationship with the mother, and because the mother waived her claim regarding the child support amount, we affirm placement of physical care with the father and the support amount.  We remand for the district court to order the mother to pay the father’s appellate attorney fees not to exceed $1500.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (2 pages)

            An inmate appeals a district court ruling on his petition for judicial review, which affirmed the Iowa Board of Parole’s denial of his conditional release on parole.  Opinion holds: Because we detect no error of law in the district court ruling, we affirm without further opinion under Iowa Court Rule 21.26(1)(d).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Jennifer Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Khamfeuang Thongvanh appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief as time-barred, arguing that the statute of limitations is unconstitutional.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Thongvanh fails to flesh out any specific arguments as to why the statute of limitations violates most of the constitutional provisions he summarily mentions, his claims are mainly waived.  His due-process challenge fails as we are bound by the supreme court’s prior rejection of a federal due-process challenge to the statute of limitations.  And the exception to the statute of limitations for a ground of fact or law that could not have been raised within the limitations period does not apply.

            Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  WRIT SUSTAINED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Dissent by Greer, P.J.  (23 pages)

            On a writ of certiorari, the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services challenges a juvenile court order prohibiting the department from changing the placement of a child in its custody without the court first holding an evidentiary hearing on whether the change is in the child’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: Because this is a question of public importance warranting a decision, we reach the merits even though the case’s progress in the juvenile court during our certiorari proceeding has mooted the question here.  And on the merits, we agree with the Department that the order exceeded the juvenile court’s limited statutory authority to review the Department’s specific placement decisions.  To be sure, the court could have reviewed and rejected the Department’s placement decision if it had found that the child proved the Department acted contrary to the child’s best interests by unreasonably or irresponsibly selecting a suitable placement—all while giving deference to the Department’s decision.  But this order was entered outside that statutory authorization.  And its prohibition on changing the specific placement—even temporarily—amounts to selecting the current placement.  Under the statute, only the Department has that authority.  To respect the different roles of the Department and the juvenile court, we must sustain the writ.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I would annul the writ; the juvenile court acted within its statutory authority when it prohibited the Department from moving the child to a new placement before the court had the chance to review the Department’s selection pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.102(1)(b) at the request of the child at issue. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            Shevell Ash appeals his two-year prison sentence for domestic abuse assault, second offense.  Ash argues that the district court improperly considered unproven criminal conduct and abused its discretion in refusing to suspend his prison sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: The court indeed relied on the conduct Ash challenges on appeal in selecting his sentence.  But it was not unproven.  The State presented sworn testimony and a recording of the phone calls at the sentencing hearing—ample evidence to support the court’s finding that Ash had violated the court order.  And we see no abuse of discretion in the district court’s ultimate sentencing decision.  We thus affirm Ash’s sentence.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children.  She contends the State did not offer clear and convincing evidence to support the statutory grounds for termination, termination was not in their best interests, the parent-child bond should prevent termination, and the State failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite the family.  OPINION HOLDS:  On our review, we reach the same conclusions as the juvenile court.  The mother cannot provide the stability that the children need.  We thus affirm the termination order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lucas County, John D. Lloyd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother did not preserve error on her reasonable-efforts challenge or her permissive-exception arguments.  And we find the children are best served by termination, as the mother made no effort to see her children in a year and a half, she has not worked toward reunification, and the children are long overdue for permanency.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother to two children and the father of the older child separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  The father argues termination of his parental rights is not in the child’s best interests and he should be given additional time to work toward reunification.  The mother broadly claims the State failed to prove its case for termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Termination of the father’s rights is in the child’s best interests, and we do not grant him additional time to work towards reunification.  The mother has failed to develop any specific claims for our review, resulting in the waiver of any claims she may have.  Nonetheless on our de novo review of the record it is clear that the State established statutory grounds for termination of the mother’s rights, termination of her rights is in the children’s best interests, and the mother could not establish a permissive exception to termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: There is clear and convincing evidence to support the statutory ground for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024), so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son, arguing that termination is not in the son’s best interest and the parent–child bond exception applies.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court that termination of the mother’s parental rights in the son’s best interest.  She has not made progress towards unsupervised visits, still struggles with substance use, and has not fully utilized mental-health services.  And the son is much improved in his foster-care placement and is finally receiving the stable home environment that he needs.  We also agree that the parent–child bond exception does not apply because the mother has not met her burden to prove that termination would be more detrimental to the son than the uncertain status quo.  We thus affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Badding, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the child cannot safely return to the mother’s care due to substance‑abuse problems and additional time was not warranted, we affirm the termination of her parental rights.  Finding the father’s arguments generally thwarted by the indefinite nature of his incarceration and possible deportation, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to one child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father failed to challenge all grounds for termination on appeal, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child, J.C.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the statutory grounds for termination have been established, termination is in the best interests of the child, and no permissive exceptions apply, we affirm termination of both parents’ parental rights to J.C.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph L. Tofilon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to three of his children.  He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, claims termination is not in the children’s best interests because permissive grounds to preclude termination exist, and argues the district court erred in denying his request for additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Having found the statutory grounds satisfied, that no permissive exception should be applied, and that an extension of time is unwarranted, we affirm termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State proved the grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence and termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the statutory grounds for termination were established, termination is in the best interest of the child, the parent-child bond permissive exception does not apply, and additional time for reunification is not warranted. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Greg Milani, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (8 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief from his incest, lascivious conduct with a minor, and third-degree sexual abuse convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because all of the applicant’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel stem from counsel’s reasoned, strategic decisions, counsel did not breach any duty and we affirm the denial of postconviction relief.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (6 pages)

    Gary Wood Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief following his 2019 conviction for domestic abuse assault.  Wood claims his appellate counsel was ineffective by failing to challenge the admissibility of a redacted 911 call on direct appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Wood did not establish prejudice, his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim fails.  Accordingly, we affirm. 
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Justin Lightfoot, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J. (7 pages)

            Robert Allen Fisher Jr. appeals his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding substantial evidence supports the conviction, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, Derek Johnson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (8 pages)

            After shooting his brother to death, Michael Hinners was charged with first-degree murder.  After a bench trial, the trial court found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter.  The court determined that assault by intentionally pointing any firearm at another—the predicate public offense to Hinners’s involuntary manslaughter conviction—was a general-intent crime.  On appeal Hinners argues assault is a specific-intent crime and the court should have therefore considered his intoxication defense.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the crime of assault by intentionally pointing a firearm at another under Iowa Code section 708.1(2)(c) is a general-intent crime.  Involuntary manslaughter, without a specific-intent element, is a general-intent crime.  Thus, the intoxication defense is not available to Hinners.  So, the district court committed no error in not addressing the intoxication defense.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Joshua Frank McCoy appeals the dismissal of his second petition for postconviction relief, after the district court found the petition was untimely.  McCoy asks this court to apply equitable tolling for second or successive petitions for postconviction relief that allege ineffective assistance of counsel in prior postconviction proceedings.  He argues section 822.3 (2023) without equitable tolling is unconstitutional.  OPINION HOLDS: We find courts have never applied equitable tolling to section 822.3 and the failure to do so is not unconstitutional.  We decline to apply equitable tolling, and, as a result, his appeal is untimely, and the district court properly dismissed his second petition for postconviction relief. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (6 pages)

            An applicant for postconviction relief (PCR) argues (1) his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to inform him of the immigration consequences of his Alford plea and (2) his PCR counsel was ineffective in failing to properly present his trial counsel’s ineffectiveness.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the applicant’s trial counsel and PCR counsel were not ineffective, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Dean Porter appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Porter admits his legal arguments are raised for the first time in this appeal, and because he presents no challenge to the district court’s rulings on the issues presented in his PCR application, we have nothing to review.  We therefore summarily affirm denial of postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Franklin County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; REVERSED AND REMANDED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (15 pages)

            Landowners appeal and the county board of supervisors acting as trustees for a drainage district cross-appeals the district court’s award of damages to the landowners after a drainage ditch project.  The landowners claim the district court erred in failing to award them “the cost to restore their farm lands with reliable functional field crossings” that can handle the increased water flow from the drainage ditch project.  On cross-appeal, the board claims the landowners are not entitled to any damages because the drainage district has a permanent easement for the drainage ditch.   OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the board, reverse the court’s damage awards, and remand for dismissal of the landowners’ petition.       

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (11 pages)

    Damien Love appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, a sentencing challenge, and a claim of actual innocence.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the court’s denial of Love’s application.
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (2 pages)

    John Berman appeals an order dismissing his lawsuit against Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company alleging civil extortion.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dismissal without opinion.  Iowa R. App. P. 6.1203 (a), (d).
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason A. Burns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Buller, P.J., Sandy, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother convicted for aiding and abetting her son’s flight from the country ten days before trial in his criminal case challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her conviction, in addition to other claims.  OPINION HOLDS:  Substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict.  We reject Younes’s remaining claims of error as waived, premature, or unpreserved.

    Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Brad McCall, Judge.  WRIT SUSTAINED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (6 pages)

    The State petitioned for certiorari, challenging a district court order overturning an administrative law judge’s (ALJ) determination the Iowa Department of Corrections (IDOC) did not improperly deprive inmate Nathan Crow of his property by seizing a nude drawing.  The State claims the district court erred by applying an injunction issued by the Polk County District Court in separate litigation to Crow’s privately created drawing.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we conclude the district court erred by overturning the ALJ’s determination.  Accordingly, we sustain the writ of certiorari. 
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

    Susan Schooler and her company, Schooler Medical Professionals, P.C., appeal the district court’s dismissal of her counterclaims to Joseph Coy’s replevin claims.  OPINION HOLDS: Coy waited too long to challenge the misjoinder of Schooler’s counterclaims.  Because we find the district court erroneously dismissed those counterclaims instead of docketing them separately, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.  
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Abdalla Elehamir Mousa appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, contending his trial counsel were ineffective for failing to investigate and call witnesses to testify, failing to properly cross‑examine a key State witness, and requesting a modified jury instruction.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Mousa did not establish either of his trial counsel were ineffective, we affirm the denial of his application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (6 pages)

            Montrell Anderson appeals the dismissal of his third application for postconviction relief (PCR) from his 2005 convictions for first-degree burglary and second-degree sexual assault.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Anderson failed to show the existence of new ground of fact that is relevant to his convictions and could not be raised during the period set out in section 822.3 (2021), we affirm the order dismissing his third PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart Werling, Judge.  SENTENCES VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J. (14 pages)

            John Grafton entered into a universal plea agreement with the State to resolve three separate criminal cases pending against him.  Grafton maintains the plea agreement he entered into was an Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.10(3) plea agreement conditioned on the district court’s concurrence.  At the conclusion of his sentencing hearing, the district court rejected Grafton’s plea agreement and imposed a harsher sentence than the one contemplated by his agreement.  On appeal, Grafton challenges his sentence arguing (1) he should have been given an opportunity to withdraw his plea; (2) the sentence violates double jeopardy; and (3) the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Grafton entered into a rule 2.10(3) plea agreement conditioned on the district court’s concurrence and the court rejected his agreement, we conclude the district court should have granted him an opportunity to withdraw his plea.  Accordingly, we vacate his sentences and remand for resentencing.  Because we find Grafton’s rule 2.10(3) claim to be dispositive, we do not address his remaining claims.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher, Badding, Chicchelly, and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (29 pages)

            A defendant appeals a district court ruling that found him liable for hostile housing environment sexual harassment, quid pro quo sexual harassment, and retaliation.  He argues there was not substantial evidence to support the district court’s factual findings.  He also challenges the reasonableness of the punitive damages assessed against him.  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence is sufficient to support the district court’s findings. And we find no legal error in the assessment of punitive damages.  Accordingly, we affirm and remand for a determination by the district court of an award of reasonable appellate attorney fees for Van Gundy. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            C.G. appeals from a protective order prohibiting contact with T.F.’s child.  OPINION HOLDS: Despite the one‑year protective order expiring while this appeal was pending, we find the case is not moot.  We affirm on the merits.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (15 pages)

            Bill McDonough appeals three financial provisions of the decree dissolving his twenty-eight-year marriage with Rachel McDonough.  He challenges: (1) the amount and duration of Rachel’s traditional-spousal-support award; (2) a restriction on the use of the children’s 529 accounts to meet his obligation to pay for their private primary and secondary schooling; and (3) a purported obligation for him to pay expenses for the parties’ adult children.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving appropriate deference to the district court, we agree that the amount of spousal support is equitable.  We reject Bill’s argument that the award should automatically end when Rachel reaches a specific age or retires—such a change in circumstances must be addressed in a modification proceeding.  But because Rachel agrees the award must end if she remarries, we modify the decree accordingly.  As for the funds in the 529 accounts, we cannot say that preserving them for college expenses is inequitable.  Bill’s challenge to the purported obligation to pay expenses for the parties’ adult children is not preserved for our review.  We thus affirm the decree as modified, assess appellate costs to Bill, award Rachel appellate attorney fees, and remand for decision on a reasonable amount of fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, Carl J. Petersen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Dennis Thompson appeals a jury’s guilty verdict, arguing the district court erred when the court allowed the State to amend the trial information during trial and insufficient evidence underlies the jury’s verdict, as the child complainant’s testimony was uncorroborated.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the amended jury instructions did not change Thompson’s trial strategy, Thompson set forth an incomplete alibi before trial started, we find the court did not err when it allowed an amendment to trial information mid-trial.  Finally, Iowa courts have found a child’s uncorroborated testimony is sufficient to underly a guilty verdict.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Margaret L. Lingreen, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (15 pages)

            Donald and Linda Lawson appeal from a judgment decree quieting title of two parcels of land in their neighbors after their neighbors brought an action to quiet title and raise several tort claims against the Lawsons.  The Lawsons argue they have an easement running through the parcels.  They also argue that the district court abused its discretion by bifurcating the quiet-title issue and tort claims and addressing the quiet-title issue first.  OPINION HOLDS: The Lawsons do not have a valid express easement, easement by implication, modified prescriptive easement, or easement by acquiescence.  The district court did not abuse its discretion when it bifurcated the quiet-title issue from the tort claims and addressed the quiet-title issue first.  However, because there is a factual dispute as to whether the Lawsons have a valid prescriptive easement, the district court erred by granting summary judgment on that claim.  We reverse the district court’s summary judgment ruling on that issue.  We remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Kevin Kelley appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, second offense, arguing it is not supported by substantial evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Considering Kelley’s admission at the scene regarding his use of methamphetamine and marijuana, the pipe in his vehicle that appeared to have burnt methamphetamine, his performance on field sobriety tests, the heat bumps on his tongue, and his refusal to give a urine sample to be tested for illegal substances after drinking large quantities of water, substantial evidence supports the jury’s determination that Kelley was “under the influence.” 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, William Patrick Wegman and Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A jury convicted Frank Berwanger of criminal mischief, interference with official acts, and eluding.  Berwanger challenges a ruling on his motion to suppress claiming the initial traffic stop was unlawful, argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support his criminal mischief conviction, and claims the district court erred by refusing to submit a self-defense instruction to the jury.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court committed no errors in finding there was substantial evidence supporting Berwanger’s conviction for criminal mischief, that the motion to suppress was without merit, and that Berwanger was not entitled to a justification jury instruction.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (3 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his sentence as a habitual offender.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the defendant’s risk‑assessment challenge was not preserved, but the fine should not have been imposed.  We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand with directions to enter a corrected sentencing order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Bonita Harland and her children, Amanda Lovig, Travis Harland, and Ethan Harland, appeal the district court’s dismissal of their petition contesting the will of Arlene Kae Severidt, Bonita’s sister.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Bonita and her children were not entitled to notice of the admission of Severidt’s will to probate, their petition is barred by the statute of limitations.  We affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Amy M. Moore and James C. Ellefson, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

    Blessing Toe pleaded guilty to extortion and assault with intent to inflict serious injury.  For these crimes, Toe received a sentence of up to seven years in prison.  On appeal, Toe challenges his written guilty plea and asks for resentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: We find good cause for Toe to appeal his plea but cannot grant the relief he seeks.  Iowa Code section 814.29 (2023) precludes us from vacating his guilty pleas.  And the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the parties’ agreed-to consecutive prison terms.  So, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Lars G. Anderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED TO DETERMINE ATTORNEY FEES.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A father, Shawn, appeals the provisions of a decree dissolving his marriage granting the mother, Emma, sole legal custody and physical care of their minor child.  The mother requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court’s custody and physical care determination; we affirm and remand to determine appellate attorney fees in a reasonable amount not to exceed $7500.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I am pleased to join in the well-reasoned majority opinion concerning the award of legal custody and physical care.  I dissent only as to the majority’s determination that Shawn should contribute to Emma’s appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brendan Greiner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            Mark Steinhelper appeals his convictions on two counts of lascivious conduct with a minor.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on the plain language and clear meaning of Iowa Code section 709.14(1) (2023), a person commits lascivious conduct with a minor by removing or forcing the removal of a minor’s clothing.   Applying that interpretation to the facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, substantial evidence shows Steinhelper committed two counts of lascivious conduct with a child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Brad McCall, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            An estate appeals the district court’s dismissal of its wrongful‑death action against a healthcare entity, contending that its claims were improperly dismissed.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the estate’s claims required a certificate of merit affidavit, and because the estate failed to file one, the claims were properly dismissed.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

    A father appeals an order modifying his former wife’s visitation schedule with their now ten-year-old daughter.  He contends that his former wife did not show a material change in circumstances justifying the modification.  He also argues that the expanded visitation is not in their daughter’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record belies both points, we affirm the modification order.  And we decline both parties’ requests for attorney fees.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John M. Wright, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (22 pages)

            Patti Englehart appeals a jury verdict against her claim of wrongful termination on several evidentiary grounds.  She contests the admission of ten exhibits and testimony from Dan Serra, her former employer, on hearsay or relevance grounds.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find that each piece of evidence was either properly admitted or admitted without prejudice, we affirm the decisions of the district court. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Russell G. Keast, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Badding, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (3 pages)

            Gita Thomas appeals her conviction for driving while barred, challenging the denial of her motion to dismiss for an alleged speedy-indictment violation.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State charged Thomas by trial information within forty-five days of her initial appearance, no speedy-indictment violation occurred and the district court properly denied Thomas’s motion.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Eric Isaiah McIntyre appeals the sentences imposed by the district court after entering pleas for several offenses.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing McIntyre, we affirm his sentences.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (2 pages)

    John Berman appeals an order dismissing his lawsuit against Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company alleging civil extortion.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dismissal without opinion.  Iowa R. App. P. 6.1203 (a), (d).
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            Stephanie Young appeals the district court’s entry of summary judgment on her legal malpractice claim for failure to designate a qualified standard-of-care expert.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Young failed to designate a qualified expert, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying her post-judgment request for an extension, summary judgment was proper.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monona County, Zachary Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            Corey Johnson challenges the dissolution decree placing his children in the physical care of their mother, Celina Johnson.  He advocates joint physical care of the children.  Corey also disputes the child and spousal support awards, claiming the court erred in not imputing income to Celina despite a longstanding agreement that she would homeschool the children until they reach the eighth grade.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s decision to grant Celina physical care of the children, as well as its refusal to impute income to her in their child-support and spousal-support determinations.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (2 pages)

    Christopher Mosset appeals his conviction for driving while barred and contends the district court abused its discretion at sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the conviction, and Mosset states no reason why the court abused its discretion.  We affirm by memorandum opinion.  See Iowa R. App. P. 21.26(1)(b), (e).
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Michael K. Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A defendant appeals his criminal sentences, claiming the district court abused its discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: Nothing in the record suggests that Ewurs’s sentence was based on unreasonable or untenable grounds, so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  Special concurrence by Greer, P.J.  (17 pages)

            Arbor Court Healthcare, LLC (Arbor Court) appeals the district court’s order affirming the final decision in its administrative appeal before the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).  Arbor Court contends that the district court (1) committed legal error in finding H.F. 891 barred HHS from rebasing Arbor Court’s Medicaid compensation rates based on a short period cost report, and alternatively, (2) H.F. 891’s prohibition on Arbor Court’s requested rebasing was unconstitutional as applied to Arbor Court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s order, finding the district court committed no errors of law and Arbor Court held no property right in the short report process.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Unlike the majority, I would find Arbor Court preserved error on the issue of the application of H.F. 891 and consider the argument on the merits.  But doing so would not lead me to a different result, as the application of HHS’s informal process as to Arbor Court could not be considered unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Becky Goettsch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (2 pages)

            Henry Drake Jr. appeals his sentence imposed following the revocation of his deferred judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm without further opinion.  Iowa R. App. P. 6.1203.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel Dalrymple, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

    Dog owners appeal a decision by the City of Cedar Falls to “humanely destroy” their American bulldog, Reese.  Their dog, according to the city council’s administration committee, poses an “unreasonable risk of harm” to the public.  The Westerns contend the record lacks substantial evidence to support that conclusion.  OPINION HOLDS: After four previous biting incidents, the city slated Reese for destruction, but the police chief gave his owners a second chance.  Unfortunately, their lack of supervision led Reese to bite a fifth individual—a teen riding by on a bicycle.  We conclude substantial evidence supports the city’s determination that the dog poses an unreasonable risk of harm to public safety, so we annul the writ.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Shane M. Wiley, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (9 pages)

            The respondent appeals a district court order that found she is seriously mentally impaired and involuntarily committed her for treatment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is a danger to herself or others, we reverse and remand with directions to terminate the respondent’s commitment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Ashley Sparks, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the district court’s order modifying parenting time in the divorce decree between him and his former wife, arguing the modification is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the modification is in the children’s best interests, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Charles C. Sinnard, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his discretionary sentence after the revocation of his deferred judgment following a guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the deferred judgment or imposing sentence.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel L. Block, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the mother’s arguments generally thwarted by the existence of a five-year no contact order, we affirm the termination of her parental rights.  Because neither child can safely return to the father’s care and additional time was not warranted, we affirm termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their son.  The mother argues that (1) the State did not prove a ground for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024) and (2) termination is not in the son’s best interest.  The father argues that (1) the juvenile court should have granted a six-month extension to work towards reunification; (2) termination of his parental rights is not in the son’s best interest; (3) the parent–child bond exception applies under Iowa Code section 232.116(3); and (4) a guardianship is a better alternative for a permanency outcome.  OPINION HOLDS: On the mother’s appeal, we agree that the State proved the statutory ground for termination—especially given her testimony agreeing that the son could not yet return to her custody at the time of the termination hearing—and that termination of the mother’s rights is in the son’s best interest.  As for the father’s appeal, we see no basis to find that the son could have been placed in his custody with another six months when it was uncertain that the father would be released from prison and he agreed he would not be ready to care for the son.  And we agree with the juvenile court that termination is in the son’s best interest, any parent–child bond does not warrant declining to terminate, and a guardianship is not appropriate here.  We thus affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals termination of her parental rights to two children.  The father of the younger child separately appeals termination of his parental rights to the younger child.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the children could not have been safely returned to the mother as of trial, an additional six months for reunification was not warranted, termination was in the children’s best interests, and the permissive bond exception is inapplicable.  The father’s claims were waived or otherwise not preserved for our review.  We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (15 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  Although they appeal separately, they raise identical claims.  Each contests the statutory grounds for termination and contends termination of their respective parental rights is not in their children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm the termination of each parent’s rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, Kristal L. Phillips, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Per Curiam.  Special concurrence by Langholz, J.  (14 pages).

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The father raises several issues on appeal, but we reach the merits on only two—the statutory grounds for termination and whether termination is in the son’s best interest.  On those claims, we find clear and convincing evidence supported terminating the father’s rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024) and the son is best served by termination.  Because the father has waived or not preserved the other issues, including his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we do not consider their merits.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I join all the majority’s opinion except for its holding that the father waived his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.  Because this is an expedited chapter 232 appeal without normal briefing, I would hold that that the father’s argument in his petition on appeal sufficiently presented this issue for our consideration.  And seeing no other barrier to reaching the merits, I would hold that the claim fails because the father cannot show any prejudice. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son.  OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court properly denied the mother’s request for six more months to work toward reunification, as she offered little evidence showing she could make the necessary progress to eliminate the need for removal by the end of that period.  Given the mother’s concession that, absent that extra time to make progress, the son could not be returned to her custody, termination was appropriate under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024).  The mother has waived any best-interest challenge.  And because the mother never advocated for a permissive exception during the termination hearing, we cannot consider the issue for the first time on appeal.  We thus affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fremont County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (5 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother has not engaged in any services or seen the children since removal, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, challenging the statutory grounds relied on by the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we conclude clear and convincing evidence exists in this record to support a ground for termination relied on by the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She claims the State failed to establish a statutory ground for termination, argues termination is not in the child’s best interests, contends the strength of the parent-child bond should preclude termination, and argues that she should at least be given additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The child could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody, establishing a ground for termination.  Termination is in the child’s best interests.  The parent-child bond is not healthy and should not be preserved.  And we do not grant the mother any additional time to work toward reunification.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Adria Kester, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (2 pages)

            Chad Vice appeals the dismissal of his civil suit for lack of service.  OPINION HOLDS: Vice’s notice of appeal was late, which deprives us of jurisdiction.  We dismiss the appeal. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (15 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his ten convictions arising from a robbery and subsequent attempted murder of a peace officer and other events.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the conviction for trafficking stolen weapons and affirm the other nine convictions.  We remand to the district court with directions.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, Lucy J. Gamon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

    The former employee of a dairy farm petitioned for replevin and damages when the farmer kept a tractor the employee alleged he owned but used in his work at the dairy.  The district court granted the employee’s petition, finding he had a superior claim of ownership, and awarding damages because the farmer wrongfully detained the tractor for more than a year.  The farmer contests that ruling, alleging the former employee acquired the tractor by fraud and has no rightful claim to own it.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the replevin ruling, and we find no error of law, so we affirm.  
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (5 pages)

    A defendant appeals his sentence for violation of sex offender registry requirements, contending that the court abused its discretion in sentencing him to an indeterminate five-year prison term.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court reached a reasonable result after weighing the appropriate factors, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Justin Lightfoot and Kevin McKeever, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (9 pages)

            Homeowners allege the district court erred in interpreting their breach‑of-contract claim and granting summary judgment on their consequential‑damages and bad‑faith claims against their insurer following the 2020 derecho windstorm.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the district court did not err in its summary judgment rulings or by dismissing the case once repair payments were made in full, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, David Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Dissent by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            Doug Faust appeals the spousal-support award of a decree dissolving his fifteen-year marriage with Abbey Faust.  He argues the ten-year award to Abbey is inequitable and should be denied or reduced in duration or amount.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, mindful of the superior position of the district court to assess Abbey’s credibility about her disability and the supreme court’s admonition to refrain from undue tinkering with spousal-support awards on appeal, we agree with the district court that the award is equitable.  DISSENT ASSERTS: While I agree the majority that Abbey Faust should be awarded some spousal support, I dissent from the majority’s decision to affirm the amount of spousal support awarded by the district court.  Equity requires a substantially lower spousal-support award, so I would modify the district court’s decree accordingly.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (13 pages)

    James Ernst appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) following his 2016 conviction of first-degree murder.  Ernst claims his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to strike a juror for cause, failing to locate and depose State and defense witnesses, failing to object to the prosecutor’s closing statement that he asserts amounted to misconduct, failing to object to a defense witness who testified while attired in inmate clothing along with handcuffs and shackles, and for failing to request a spoliation instruction concerning a lost video.  Also, Ernst claims his PCR counsel was ineffective by failing to contact or investigate witnesses who would have testified at the PCR hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            Lundell Buchanan appeals the district court’s dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  On appeal, he argues the district court erred by excluding his telephonic testimony and by finding his trial counsel were not ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly determined Buchanan failed to prove his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance.  We affirm the decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (14 pages)

            Scott Family Properties, LLC appeals a district court judgment finding that it breached a real-estate contract and ordering specific performance.  Scott Properties argues that the buyer, Woodland Hills, LLC, repudiated the contract when it offered a new closing date and that Woodland Hills’ failure to perform on the original closing date relieved Scott Properties of any contract obligations after that date.  OPINION HOLDS: Woodland Hills did not repudiate the contract—proposing a new closing date was an option expressly contemplated by the contract.  And Woodland Hills could not perform on the original closing date because Scott Properties failed to provide the information necessary to tender payment or otherwise close.  What’s more, the mutual failure to perform on that date kept the contract alive.  So when Scott Properties later refused to perform, it breached the purchase agreement.  We thus affirm the district court and award Woodland Hills appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Martha L. Mertz, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Remainder beneficiaries appeal the district court and trustee’s approval of a $30,000 distribution from a trust’s principal to help fund the lifetime beneficiary’s criminal defense in an unrelated matter.  OPINION HOLDS: The trustee did not abuse his discretion when approving the distribution, and the distribution does not violate the trust’s spendthrift clause.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            David Stuart appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of certiorari challenging the Dubuque Building Code Advisory and Appeal Board’s denial of his appeals of three housing notices of violation.  Stuart argues that the district court erred in finding the petition untimely and that the court should have granted him an extension of time because his untimely filing was “due to a failure of the tribunal, board or officer to notify the petitioner of the challenged decision.”  Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.1402(3).  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that Stuart’s thirty-day clock started no later than the date the Board mailed its written decision—the date of his receipt is irrelevant.  So his petition filed thirty-two days later was untimely.  And because Stuart makes no argument that any action of the Board prevented him from receiving notice within the thirty-day window for filing, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for an extension of time.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey D. Bert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for unauthorized use of a credit card and theft in the second degree.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding his instructional‑error claim was not preserved and no legal error in the jury’s verdict, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            Todd Woodworth appeals the district court’s ruling denying his application for postconviction relief.  On appeal, he asserts he received ineffective assistance of counsel from his attorney at his probation revocation hearing because she did not adequately advise him on the benefits of testifying at the hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Woodworth has not established the necessary prejudice to succeed on an ineffective-assistance claim, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            Brent Shaikoski challenges his conviction for felony eluding of a law enforcement vehicle.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there is sufficient evidence to uphold Shaikoski’s conviction.  The jury was free to reject Shaikoski’s claim that his passenger took over driving in the middle of the high-speed chase. 

            Certiorari from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Nasir Abdul-Woodud Shabazz Jr. appeals the district court’s grant of a motion to correct illegal sentence, arguing his original deferred judgment was proper because “supervision” in Illinois does not qualify as “similar relief” under Iowa law.  He also claims his counsel at the district court was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS: Because ineffective assistance of counsel claims may only be addressed on postconviction review, we do not make any assessment on the merits of his claim.  After comparing “supervision” in Illinois to deferred judgments in Iowa, we find Illinois’s supervision is similar relief for the purposes of Iowa Code section 907.3. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Andrew Chappell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

    Marsalis Jones challenges both the sufficiency and the weight of the evidence supporting his conviction for felony domestic abuse assault after a jury trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no error in the district court’s denial of Jones’s motion for judgment of acquittal and no abuse of discretion in its refusal to grant a new trial, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Special Concurrence by Greer, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Christopher Hidlebaugh attempts to appeal his sentence following a guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: Hidlebaugh cannot establish good cause to appeal following his guilty plea because he attempts to challenge a sentence that he agreed to as a term of his guilty plea, so we dismiss his attempted appeal.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Given the procedural history and our caselaw, I agree that we lack jurisdiction to decide Christopher Hidlebaugh’s appeal. I write separately to highlight that while a defendant’s indigency in no way immunizes him from punishment, incarcerating a defendant based solely on his inability to follow through with a financial undertaking is unconstitutional.  I encourage district court judges to carefully scrutinize a plea agreement like the one entered into by Hidlebaugh and the State. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, Shawn Showers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Jeremy Everett Goodale, a juvenile offender, appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to first‑degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the sentencing court thoroughly considered each of the requisite factors afforded to juveniles, we affirm Goodale’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stewart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals dismissal of a medical negligence action based on decertification of her expert witness as untimely.  OPINION HOLDS: Because a trial judge may correct a prior ruling any time before final judgment, the district court was permitted to revisit its prior good‑cause determination under Iowa Code section 668.11 (2019) four years after the initial determination.  Finding the district court did not abuse its discretion in later decertifying the expert witness for an absence of good cause under section 668.11 in light of new unpublished caselaw from our court, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Terry Lord appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief as time-barred arguing that the statute of limitations is unconstitutional.  OPINION HOLDS: Assuming that Lord’s due-process challenge to the statute of limitations is preserved for appellate review, we cannot overrule our supreme court.  So we are bound by its prior rejection of a federal due-process challenge to the statute of limitations.  To the extent that Lord attempts to make any other state or federal constitutional challenges to the statute of limitations they are waived or not preserved. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (2 pages)

            Michael Schawitsch appeals the summary dismissal of his sixth application for postconviction relief as time-barred.  OPINION HOLDS: While Schawitsch urges us to overrule our supreme court’s prior rejection of a federal due-process challenge to the statute of limitations, we are bound by the controlling precedent.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Russell G. Keast, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (2 pages)

            A criminal defendant attempts to appeal her conviction for a simple misdemeanor.  OPINION HOLDS: To the extent we construe the papers filed as an application for discretionary review, we deny the application and dismiss the attempted appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Dissent by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            A former spouse appeals a district court ruling that commenced interest on a judgment lien from the date of the contempt hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Having considered the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, we grant the petition but conclude error is not preserved and annul the writ.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Contrary to the majority decision, I would sustain the writ of certiorari.  I would find error was preserved on the issue and conclude that interest should run from the end of 2004 instead of the date the application for rule to show cause was filed given Timothy Ott’s stipulation concerning the date of his first refinancing. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (5 pages)

            James Martin Peterson appeals his sentences, arguing the district court erred when the court did not place Peterson on probation, allowing for treatment in the community.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court did not abuse its discretion, we uphold the sentences, as imposed, by the district court.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (14 pages)

            An applicant for postconviction relief (PCR) appeals the district court’s denial of his most recent PCR application, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective for (1) failing to move to suppress his statements to authorities on the basis he had not been read Miranda rights and (2) failing to object to trial testimony from law enforcement officials on the basis they were vouching for the victim.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the applicant’s trial counsel was not ineffective, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Justin R. Wyatt, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCES VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            Jennifer Archer appeals from her convictions and sentences for burglary in the third degree and attempted burglary in the third degree.  OPINION HOLDS: The video evidence played at trial and the homeowners’ testimony provided sufficient evidence to affirm Archer’s convictions.  But because the court failed to give reasons for imposing consecutive sentences, we vacate Archers’ sentences and remand for resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tamra Roberts, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Michael Raymond Russell appeals his convictions for possession of contraband (a dangerous weapon) in a jail facility and criminal mischief in the fifth degree (damage to property), arguing there is insufficient evidence on record to support a conviction on either count.  OPINION HOLDS: Because sufficient evidence supports a finding that Russell had actual possession of the homemade weapon and had specific intent to damage the shower track, we affirm the jury’s verdicts. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF NUNC PRO TUNC.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Corey Jackson appeals his sentence, arguing that the State breached the plea agreement by referencing criminal conduct that was not part of the plea agreement.  He argues the district court improperly considered such conduct during sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the conduct raised by the State was the factual basis for the plea agreement and the consideration of these events was not improper, we affirm the decisions of the district court.  Additionally, the sentencing order incorrectly listed Jackson’s pled-to offense.  We remand to the district court for entry of a nunc pro tunc order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (4 pages)

            Ewaun Gardner Jr. appeals his sentences for conspiracy to commit a non-forcible felony and fourth-degree theft, arguing that the district court abused its discretion by failing to grant him a deferred judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding that a deferred judgment was inappropriate—despite Gardner’s youth—because of the seriousness of these two offenses involving a stolen gun and the fact that they were committed while Gardner was on pretrial supervision for another offense. 

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother requests a delayed appeal and a reversal of the order terminating her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we determine that the mother’s request for a delayed appeal does not meet the three-factor test set out by our supreme court in In re A.B., 957 N.W.2d 280 (Iowa 2021), we dismiss her appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie Talkington, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal a juvenile court order terminating their parental rights.  The mother challenges all three steps in our termination analysis, while the father only contests the statutory grounds for termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We summarily affirm the mother’s appeal because she only advanced arguments on the father’s behalf.  On the father’s appeal, we find sufficient evidence supported a statutory ground for termination.  Thus, we affirm the termination of both parents’ rights to their child. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (10 pages)

                A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, contending the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination, the department failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification, and a permissive exception should be granted due to either relative custody or the parent‑child bond.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the statutory grounds have been met, her reasonable‑efforts challenge is waived, and we decline to apply a permissive exception, we affirm termination of the mother’s parental rights to her child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s rejection of her reasonable-efforts challenge and its entry of a bridge modification order placing her children in the sole legal custody and physical care of the children’s father.  OPINION HOLDS: The Iowa Department of Health and Human Services made reasonable efforts toward reunification between the mother and her children.  It is in the children’s best interests to modify the parents’ custodial terms to place the children in the father’s sole legal custody and physical care.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Union County, John D. Lloyd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, challenging the statutory grounds relied on by the district court.  The mother also asserts termination is not in the child’s best interest, requests an extension of time for reunification efforts, and requests that a guardianship be established in lieu of termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  Partial Dissent by Buller, J.  (14 pages)

            The mother and father of K.B., born in 2021, separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  Both parents challenge the statutory grounds and argue termination of their respective parental rights is not in K.B.’s best interests because of the closeness of each parent’s relationship with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: As to the mother’s appeal, we conclude she may challenge the first two steps of the termination analysis—whether a statutory ground was proved and if termination of her rights is in the child’s best interests—even though she did not attend the termination hearing and her attorney (who was present) did not present evidence, cross-examine the witness, or convey even a general resistance.  After considering the merits of the mother’s arguments, we affirm the termination of her parental rights.  As to the father’s appeal, because the State proved a statutory ground for termination, termination of the father’s rights is in the child’s best interests, and the father did not establish that a permissive exception is warranted, we affirm the termination of his parental rights.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because my view is that we should enforce our error-preservation rules rather than allow exceptions to swallow them, I dissent in part.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in 2011.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother has not shown that any of the circumstances in section 232.116(3) exist, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her one-year-old son.  She contends the State did not offer clear and convincing evidence that he could not be safely returned to her custody.  She also maintains that preserving her parental rights serves the child’s best interests and the juvenile court should have denied the State’s petition given the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the record, we reach the same conclusions as the juvenile court: the child cannot be returned to the mother’s custody, termination is in the child’s best interests, and the risks the child would face if returned would outweigh the trauma caused by the termination.  Thus, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Lars G. Anderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J. (13 pages)

            Alexander Jackson appeals his three convictions for first-degree murder.  He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the district court’s refusal to give the exact jury instruction he requested, and evidentiary rulings.  OPINION HOLDS: Jackson’s convictions are supported by sufficient evidence.  The district court did not abuse its discretion by not using the exact phrasing Jackson requested for a jury instruction.  The district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting video exhibits of law enforcement interviews with Jackson and rejecting Jackson’s claims that the videos’ unfair prejudice significantly outweighed their probative value.  The district court erred by admitting hearsay through law enforcement testimony about what people specifically told them because the testimony was not offered to show responsive conduct.  However, the State has overcome the resulting presumption of prejudice because the evidence was duplicative of other, properly admitted evidence; the court provided a limiting instruction to the jury; and the evidence of Jackson’s guilt was overwhelming.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg and Jeanie Vaudt, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered En Banc.  Opinion by Buller, J.  Special Concurrence by Badding, J.  (21 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals three convictions for second-degree sexual abuse.  He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and argues the district court erred in allowing the victim to testify by closed circuit pursuant to our state statute codifying the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the convictions.  And we conclude the evidentiary record satisfied the statute permitting closed-circuit testimony in compliance with federal constitutional law.  We find no state constitutional claim was preserved or properly raised on appeal.  We affirm.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: While the record provides just enough support for a finding of necessity, this case should not be used as a blueprint for the evidence needed to satisfy the requirements of Iowa Code section 915.38(1)(a) (Supp. 2022) and Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836 (1990).  More should be presented in the future to ensure that the exception does not swallow the constitutional rule favoring face-to-face confrontation.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART; SENTENCE VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (12 pages)
    
    Tyler Freemont appeals his convictions for attempted murder, willful injury causing serious injury, and going armed with intent.  He challenges hearsay testimony and the sufficiency of the evidence of the going-armed-with-intent conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the record, we find the State did not present sufficient proof of movement to convict Freemont of going armed with intent.  We reverse that conviction and remand for the district court to vacate that part of his sentence.  But we affirm his attempted-murder and willful-injury convictions because admission of the hearsay statements, if erroneous, was harmless.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (2 pages)

            Samir Muhamedagic appeals the district court’s order on his breach-of-contract action against Lejla Suljevic following the sale of a semi-truck.  Muhamedagic challenges the court’s findings relating to his repossession of the truck upon Suljevic’s breach of the parties’ contract.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we conclude the judgment of the district court is correct, no error of law appears, the questions presented are not of sufficient importance to justify an opinion, and an opinion would not have precedential value.  Accordingly, we affirm without opinion.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (9 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of his postconviction relief application, which raised ineffective-assistance and actual-innocence claims.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant has failed to show any breach of duty by counsel, that he would not have accepted the favorable plea agreement but for counsel’s actions, and that no reasonable juror would have convicted him of the theft and assault offense, we affirm the denial of his application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tamara Roberts, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (2 pages)

            Justin Lamont Wright appeals his conviction for first‑degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we lack authority to hear this appeal, we must dismiss.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (16 pages)

            Donald Turner appeals, and his employer—NCI Building Systems—cross-appeals, the district court’s denial of their petition and cross-petition for judicial review of the workers’ compensation commissioner’s ruling.  NCI challenges the commissioner’s decisions that Turner’s work injury caused his mental-health condition, Turner’s physical injuries resulted in an industrial disability rather than scheduled injuries, and that the amount of that industrial disability is forty percent.  It also argues the commissioner improperly admitted a medical report that Turner submitted after the hearing.   Turner challenges the commissioner’s finding that the mental-health condition is not permanent or, in the alternative, the lack of any award of healing-period benefits.   OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not error in affirming the commissioner.  The commissioner’s evidentiary ruling was not an abuse of discretion.  All the challenged findings are supported by substantial evidence.  And the commissioner’s decision is not otherwise unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious, irrational, illogical, or wholly unjustifiable on any issue properly preserved for our review.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Martha L. Mertz, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J. (5 pages)

            Antonio Lewis appeals his conviction for first-degree murder, arguing there is insufficient evidence to support the jury’s determination he was the person who killed his girlfriend, Karisa Shendelman.  OPINION HOLDS: The State presented evidence that officers responding to the 911 call found Lewis alone and covered in blood in the apartment with his dead girlfriend.  Lewis’s statements to officers explaining what happened were inconsistent—with each other and with the evidence that was collected.  Later, when he was in custody, Lewis admitted that he “stabbed a white bitch.”  Substantial evidence supports the jury’s determination that Lewis killed Karisa; we affirm his conviction for first-degree murder.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Lucy J. Gamon, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered by Badding, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, P.J.  (16 pages)

            Mark Groenendyk appeals, and Tammy Groenendyk cross-appeals, from the economic provisions of their divorce decree.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the district court’s value for one of their farms and remove a debt owed to their farming corporation from the property division.  Accordingly, we increase the total cash equalization payment that Mark owes to Tammy.  We do not disturb the rest of the district court’s equitable distribution of property or its decision to deny Tammy’s request for spousal support.  We also deny her request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (18 pages)

            Sarah Bailey and the estate of Eric Bailey appeal the district court’s entry of judgment following a jury trial in which they were found liable for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation and assessed damages.  The Baileys argue the district court (1) abused its discretion in excluding their proposed Exhibit L, (2) abused its discretion in excluding testimony relating to Sarah’s character for truthfulness, (3) abused its discretion in accepting the jury’s award of speculative and excessive damages, and (4) committed a combination of errors that cumulatively denied the Baileys a fair trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuses of discretion, we affirm the district court’s entry of judgment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (6 pages)

            An applicant for postconviction relief appeals the district court’s order granting the State’s motion for summary disposition and denying his application, arguing that newly discovered evidence overcomes the time bar to his application.  OPINION HOLDS: Since the applicant’s proposed newly discovered evidence is not relevant and would not have changed the result of his trial, we find that his PCR application is barred by the statute of limitations.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (21 pages)

            Property owner Meera Enterprise, LLC appeals from a jury’s verdict awarding a storm restoration contractor, Aesthetic Elements, Inc., liquidated damages on the contractor’s claim for breach of contract.  Meera challenges (1) whether there was an enforceable contract; (2) the enforceability of a liquidated damages provision in that contract; (3) the admission of lost-profits testimony from the owner of Aesthetic Elements; and (4) the court’s refusal to submit a spoliation instruction to the jury.  OPINION HOLDS: Having considered all the challenges raised by Meera on appeal, we affirm the jury’s verdict awarding Aesthetic Elements $93,329 in liquidated damages for Meera’s breach of the parties’ enforceable service agreement.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Ronald Cooley challenges his conviction for failing to comply with the sex offender registration requirements, second offense.  Cooley argues his conviction should be reversed because he was unable to comply with the statute as written—by registering in person—due to the local government’s decision to close the sheriff’s office during the COVID-19 pandemic.  More specifically, he maintains (1) the local decision to close the sheriff’s office and require offenders to register via alternative means (without the Iowa legislature amending the statute) amounts to a constitutional violation of the separation-of-powers doctrine and is fatal to applying the statute against him; (2) the marshalling jury instruction was in error because it did not include the statutory requirement that he register in person; and (3) there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Cooley failed to preserve his separation-of-powers claim, the marshalling instruction was proper in this case, and sufficient evidence supports his conviction, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Buller, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Buller, J.  Dissent by Langholz, J.  (18 pages)

            An employer appeals from a judicial-review proceeding following an adverse decision by the workers’ compensation commissioner.  OPINION HOLDS: Interpreting the statute in question in favor of the employee, we affirm the award of benefits.  Substantial evidence supports commissioner’s industrial disability determination.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Tyler Dungan returned to work and received the same or greater earnings as he did at the time of his unscheduled injury.  The plain and unambiguous text of Iowa Code section 85.34(2)(v) (2019) thus requires Dungan to “be compensated based only upon [his] functional impairment resulting from the injury, and not in relation to [his] earning capacity.”  And so, I would reverse the district court’s and workers’ compensation commissioner’s contrary interpretation of the statute and remand for the commissioner to decide an award based only on Dungan’s functional impairment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Buller, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Following his 2014 convictions for burglary in the first degree and robbery in the first degree, Joel Zamora filed his second application for postconviction relief, which the district court summarily dismissed as time-barred.  Zamora appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Zamora failed to establish a new ground of fact that allows him to overcome the three-year statute of limitations, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Dustria A. Relph, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A postconviction-relief (PCR) applicant appeals the district court’s order granting the State’s motion for summary disposition of his PCR application.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the PCR application is not based on a ground of fact or law that could not have been raised within the three-year statute of limitation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            The City of Dubuque appeals the district court’s ruling on judicial review, which affirmed a voluntary annexation.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not err in its ruling on judicial review, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly J. Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

    Carlos Wakely appeals the revocation of his deferred judgment after he pleaded guilty to domestic abuse assault causing bodily injury.  He claims the district court acted out of emotion when considering his probation violation and then entering judgment on his serious misdemeanor conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: The court did not abuse its discretion by substituting a suspended sentence in place of Wakely’s deferred judgment after considering his attitude at the probation violation hearing, the nature and circumstances of the assault, protection of the public, Wakely’s criminal history, his propensity for further criminal acts, his maximum opportunity for rehabilitation, and the plea agreement.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (12 pages)

            Matthew Meisheid appeals his convictions and sentences for two counts of assault on a peace officer while displaying a dangerous weapon in violation of Iowa Code sections 708.1(2)(c) and 708.3A(2) (2022).  He argues that the evidence was insufficient on two elements of the offense—that he displayed the gun “in a threatening manner” and that he did so “toward” either deputy.”  And he contends the district court abused its discretion in finding no mitigating circumstances to reduce his mandatory minimum sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports both challenged elements of the offense.  And we do not interpret the statutory term “display toward” to require Meisheid to “point toward” the deputies with the gun because the statute separately prohibits pointing a weapon toward another.  We see no abuse of discretion in the district court’s sentencing.  The record shows that the court was aware of the potential mitigating circumstances and merely concluded they did not warrant sentencing Meisheid to less than the mandatory minimum.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A defendant appeals his sentence for third-degree sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the defendant has not shown the sentencing court abused its discretion when considering the victim impact statement, declining to impose probation, or declining to suspend the statutory fine and surcharge, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED As MODIFIED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (15 pages)

            Mathias Libby appeals the district court order denying his petition for modification of the custody decree for his minor daughter.  Specifically, he argues the district court erred in not granting his requests for joint physical care and ordering a minor alteration to the holiday visitation schedule.  He also contends the district court erred by awarding the child’s mother trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: After our review of the record, we conclude the district court properly denied Libby’s requests for modification.  However, we find the district court abused its discretion in awarding the child’s mother trial attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Sean W. McPartland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            Mortgagors in a foreclosure proceeding—Lien Vu, Sankar Baruah, and Liberty View Mall, L.L.C.—appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the mortgagee—Solon State Bank.  They argue foreclosure was improper because they entered into a forbearance agreement with Solon State Bank.  OPINION HOLDS: The mortgagors failed to generate a dispute of material fact over whether the parties entered into a forbearance agreement.  Their summary-judgment evidence does not show any mutual intent to cabin Solon State Bank’s foreclosure rights, instead resting exclusively on their own subjective—and unilateral—understanding of the circumstances.  And they cannot rely on Solon State Bank’s course of conduct leading up to foreclosure to infer the existence of an agreement, as Solon State Bank could accept partial payments without waiving its foreclosure rights and indeed acted to enforce its rights, including accelerating all three notes.  Thus, because the mortgagors agree they were in default and we find no evidence showing the parties entered into a forbearance agreement, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (12 pages)

    Robert and Judy Millius sued Area Residential Care, Inc. and Area Residential Care Foundation (collectively ARC) on behalf of their son, Logan, in January 2022.  After a series of discovery disputes between counsel for the parties, the district court dismissed the Milliuses’ suit with prejudice in September 2023.  The Milliuses appeal, arguing that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing their claims because their failure to comply with the rules of civil procedure and the court’s discovery orders was not willful or in bad faith.  They also argue that providing ARC’s counsel with a patient waiver satisfying Iowa Code section 622.10(3) (2022) obviated the need to respond to ARC’s requests for production of Logan’s medical information.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding that the Milliuses failed to preserve error on the patient-waiver issue and no abuse of discretion in the district court’s dismissal of the Milliuses’ claims as a sanction for their repeated violations of the court’s orders and discovery rules, we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Badding, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (2 pages)

            Larry Bell Sr. appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his claims of “destruction of personal property.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm without opinion pursuant to Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.1203.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (8 pages)

            A defendant appeals a discretionary sentence imposed following guilty pleas to theft in two case numbers.  The defendant argues the district court abused its discretion when imposing a prison sentence by relying on what he claims were impermissible factors—his substance‑abuse history and failure to rehabilitate.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding these considerations required by law and supported by the record before the sentencing court, we discern no abuse of discretion and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

                Joseli Alves‑Dunkerson and Relationship, Intimacy & Sexual Health, Inc. (RIS) appeal the district court’s judgment against them in a breach‑of‑contract action.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not err in finding that Alves‑Dunkerson and RIS breached the contract, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Patrick D. Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (11 pages)

    Michelle Tuttle, a workers’ compensation claimant, appeals the district court’s dismissal of her judicial review action asserting the deputy workers’ compensation commissioner lacks the authority to enter sanctions following her serving a subpoena on an agency witness.  After an earlier remand from our court, Tuttle recast and amended her petition for judicial review.  The district court found Tuttle has an adequate agency remedy in appealing the deputy’s decision to the commissioner that she has not yet exhausted.  Unhappy with the judicial review decision, she appeals, contending there is no adequate agency remedy to exhaust because the deputy and the commissioner lack “subject matter jurisdiction” to “adjudicate subpoenas.”  She also contends the proceedings before the commissioner violated her due process rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court correctly determined that Tuttle has an adequate agency remedy in asking the commissioner to determine whether the deputy had the statutory authority to impose the sanction that she has not yet exhausted.  Tuttle did not preserve the due process issue for review.  We affirm the district court’s decision.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A defendant convicted for failing to appear for sentencing in a separate criminal matter appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Reviewing for abuse of discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the district court’s final judgment establishing custody, visitation, and child support.  He argues the district court erred in (1) finding joint physical care was not in the best interests of the children and awarding primary physical care with the mother, and (2) calculating child support and past child support.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s physical care determination and the father’s child support obligation but modify the father’s back child support obligation.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Edward Campbell appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Campbell’s application was filed well beyond the three-year limitation period and he has not shown an exception applies, we affirm the dismissal of his application as time-barred.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (5 pages)

James Morgan Jr. appeals his sentence for two burglary convictions, arguing that the prosecutor breached the plea agreement.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the prosecutor appearing at Morgan’s sentencing violated the plea agreement by making no recommendation for concurrent sentences, we vacate the consecutive ten-year terms and remand for resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            A parent appeals a sanctions order that awarded attorney fees and dismissed his petition to modify custody.  OPINIONS HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding a violation of Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.413 and imposing a monetary sanction against the father, we affirm in part.  But dismissal was not an appropriate sanction under our case law, so we reverse in part and remand for further proceedings. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Andrew Chappell, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (15 pages)

            A Cedar Rapids resident appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his lawsuit claiming members of the Cedar Rapids city council violated Iowa’s open meetings statute when they closed the job interview of an applicant for the position of city clerk and argues the district court erred in its orders closing part of the trial and sealing the recording of the job interview meeting.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s judgment and hold that the closed session should have been reopened to the public upon the council’s assessment that no needless and irreparable injury would occur to the applicant during the interview.  Accordingly, we remand for the district court to determine damages and any applicable defenses.  We affirm the district court’s denial of the resident’s motion to reconsider insofar as it relates to the district court’s decision to close part of trial and seal the closed meeting recording. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Sean Huffman appeals an Iowa Department of Health and Human Services’s founded child abuse assessment and the placement of his name on the child abuse registry.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no violation of Huffman’s rights, and we conclude Huffman has failed to show the invalidity of the Department’s findings and placement of his name on the central registry. Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Patrick McAvan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the private termination of his parental rights to his son under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2023).  He argues the mother did not prove the statutory ground of abandonment or that termination is in the son’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving the juvenile court’s factual findings their due weight, we find the father has not maintained substantial and continuous contact with the son since 2020 and thus abandoned the son.  And termination of the father’s parental rights is in the son’s best interest, especially considering the limited father-son relationship and the healthy environment now provided by the mother and her fiancé.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (16 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for murder in the second degree, abuse of a corpse, and theft in the second degree.  He argues prosecutorial misconduct, challenges the jury instructions on territorial jurisdiction, and claims the district court abused its discretion in imposing consecutive rather than concurrent terms of incarceration.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the defendant cannot prove he was prejudiced by any alleged misconduct, error was not preserved on the territorial-jurisdiction claim, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing consecutive sentences, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Rustin T. Davenport, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (6 pages)

            Randol Garcia appeals his sentence, alleging that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to a term of incarceration.  Garcia, a juvenile at the time of the commission of the offense, argues the court failed to fully consider mitigating factors when formulating the court’s sentencing decision.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm Garcia’s sentence, finding no abuse of discretion by the district court.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Tabitha Turner, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (7 pages)

            The State appeals the dismissal of its prosecution of Teara Cole after the district court found the State violated Cole’s right to speedy indictment.  The parties dispute the event by which Iowa’s speedy-indictment rule measures the permissible indictment window.  OPINION HOLDS: With the benefit of recent guidance from our supreme court, we conclude the district court erred by calculating the speedy-indictment window from the date of Cole’s arrest rather than the date of Cole’s initial appearance.   Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (3 pages)

            A defendant challenges the sentences imposed following his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when making its sentencing determination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cherokee County, John M. Sandy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (12 pages)

            Jeffrey Goodwin is a sexually violent predator committed to State care at the Civil Commitment Unit for Sexual Offenders (CCUSO); he brought a civil suit with four counts of negligence against the State based on allegations the State-employed psychologist who provided him mental-health treatment at CCUSO engaged in inappropriate sexual conduct with him during his weekly therapy sessions.  The State successfully moved for summary dismissal based upon the claim that Goodwin’s failure to enlist an expert and file a certificate of merit was fatal to his case under Iowa Code section 147.140 (2022).  Goodwin challenges that ruling on appeal, arguing an expert was not necessary to establish that engaging in sexual conduct with one’s mental-health patient was improper.  OPINION HOLDS: Because each of Goodwin’s four negligence claims require expert testimony to establish the standard of care and whether the psychologist’s alleged conduct violated that standard, he was required to file a certificate of merit within sixty days of the State’s answer.  His failure to do so mandates dismissal with prejudice; we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (4 pages)           

            James Troy Johnson appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after pleading guilty to possession of a controlled substance, third or subsequent offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing Johnson, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Cody Chandler appeals the district court’s award of costs following a defense verdict in Chandler’s personal-injury action.  Chandler claims the district court abused its discretion by taxing him the costs of an expert witness deposition, a portion of his own deposition, and an expert witness fee.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand with directions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Jason Tyer appeals his sentence for domestic abuse assault, third offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the order sentencing Tyer to serve a term of no more than five years in prison with a minimum sentence of five years complies with the law, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Raul Ruiz Jr. appeals the summary dismissal of his fifth application for postconviction relief.  He claims summary disposition was not appropriate because he created a genuine issue of material fact on whether his application contained newly discovered evidence that would except it from the three-year time-bar.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            A joint drainage district appeals the writ of mandamus prohibiting it from boring a drainpipe through a railroad embankment to increase surface water drainage in an adjacent culvert.  The sole question on appeal is whether federal law preempts the remedial action on the embankment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the planned improvement affects railroad transportation under the unique facts of this case, the ICCTA expressly preempts the joint drainage district from undertaking it.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (5 pages)

            Quincy Jennings appeals his conviction for third-degree burglary, second offense, after a guilty plea, arguing that he was given a “deficient advisory regarding a Motion in Arrest of Judgment and its implications for [his] appellate rights” and thus that due process requires a remand to let him file such a motion.  OPINION HOLDS: We lack jurisdiction over this appeal following a guilty plea because Jennings’s conviction is not for a class “A” felony and Jennings has not established good cause.  We thus dismiss this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Brandon Schrock, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            A defendant appeals his sentence following his guilty plea for participation in a riot, arguing that the trial court improperly considered unproven offenses or conduct in its sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Tabor, C.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  Dissent by Sandy, J. (39 pages)

    A father appeals the termination-of-parental-rights order concluding he abandoned his son under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(a) (2024).  He raises two issues.  First, he argues that section 600A.8(3) is unconstitutional—both on its face and as applied—because it shifts the burden to the parent to rebut a presumption of abandonment.  Second, he contends that the child’s legal custodian did not offer clear and convincing evidence that he abandoned the child or that termination was in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: On the first issue, the father did not raise a facial constitutional challenge in the district court.  Thus, we have nothing to review.  By contrast, he minimally preserved error on the as-applied challenge.  But in resolving that issue, we find no constitutional violation.  On the second issue, we give deference to the factual findings of the district court, especially on witness credibility.  After finding the father’s testimony was not entirely reliable, the court decided that the child’s legal custodian presented sufficient proof of abandonment.  The court also found that it was in the child’s best interests to be adopted.  After our de novo review of the record, we reach the same conclusions as the district court.  So, we affirm.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Lacking clear and convincing evidence that B.W. abandoned his child, I would accordingly reverse the judgment of the district court and dismiss the petition to terminate B.W.’s parental rights.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Peter B. Newell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered en banc.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Partial Dissent by Buller, J. (13 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, challenging all three steps in our statutory framework.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother continued to struggle with maintaining sobriety and the child is best served by permanency, the State met its burden to show termination is proper by clear and convincing evidence.  As for the statutory exceptions to termination, the mother’s failure to advance these arguments at the termination hearing and offer any evidence in support waives her challenge to that step on appeal. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because the error-preservation issue is not dispositive to this appeal, it is unnecessary to abrogate or overrule our unpublished cases.  And there are public policy questions that warrant scrutiny by the elected branches, so I dissent in part.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph L. Tofilon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: On review, we affirm that termination is in the children’s best interests, no permissive exception precludes termination, and an additional six months’ time for reunification was not warranted.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, Linnea M.N. Nicol, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

                A mother appeals the juvenile court’s dispositional review order and finding of reasonable efforts.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the continued removal of M.A. from the mother’s custody is in her best interests and the department made reasonable efforts towards reunification, we affirm.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.  She contends that the State failed to prove the statutory grounds for termination; termination is not in the children’s best interests; and termination, in fact, would harm them because of their close bond with her.  She also asks for six more months to reunify her family and mentions the possibility of establishing a guardianship with a relative or fictive kin.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, but deferring to the juvenile court’s credibility findings, we affirm the termination order.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  Both claim the district court erred in concluding the child could not safely be returned to their custody and termination is not in the child’s best interests.  The mother further contends her bond with the child should preclude termination, the court should have granted her additional time to work toward reunification, and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the parents’ parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The father did not establish the need for removal would no longer exist within six months, so an extension was not warranted.  The State proved a ground for termination and that it was in the child’s best interests, so we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Elizabeth Batey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She challenges the statutory grounds for termination, claims termination is not in the child’s best interests, and argues we should apply a permissive exception to termination and instead establish a guardianship for the child.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established that the child could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing, establishing a statutory ground for termination.  Termination is in the child’s best interests.  The mother did not meet her burden to prove a permissive exception to termination, and a guardianship is not a viable option in this instance. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Partial Dissent by Buller, J.  (12 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son, arguing (1) the statutory ground for termination cannot apply since the son was not removed from his mother’s custody; (2) the State failed to meet its extra requirement for termination under the Iowa Indian Child Welfare Act; and (3) termination is not in the son’s best interest.  OPINION HOLDS: The ground for termination, Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024), does not require the son to be removed from the custody of both parents.  Ample evidence in the record, including a qualified expert representing the Osage Nation, shows beyond a reasonable doubt that failing to terminate would likely result in serious emotional or physical damage to the son.  And termination of the father’s parental rights is in the son’s best interest.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur in the judgment but, for the reasons expressed in my partial dissent in In re J.R., I dissent from the majority's reliance on that decision to find error was preserved on an issue that was not challenged below.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to her son.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding (1) the mother waived any challenge to the ground for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h), and (2) termination is in the child’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s dispositional order adjudicating her daughter in need of assistance and continuing the daughter’s removal from her custody.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find clear and convincing evidence supports adjudicating the daughter in need of assistance.  As for removal, the mother’s appeal from the initial ex parte removal is now moot.  And after the dispositional hearing, the juvenile court appropriately extended the daughter’s removal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  Partial Dissent by Buller, J.  (13 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing the district court was incorrect when the court found a statutory basis for termination and found termination was in the best interest of the child.  He argues the parent-child bond provides an exception to the termination of parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the father cannot provide a safe and stable home for the child and the termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interests, we affirm the termination of parental rights.  The parent-child bond does not overcome this finding.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur in the judgment but, for the reasons expressed in my partial dissent in In re J.R., I dissent from the majority’s reliance on that decision’s approach to error preservation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The father’s petition on appeal did not substantively challenge any element of the ground for termination, which we find was sufficiently established.  And although the father and children are bonded, he did not prove termination of the bond would be detrimental to the children’s best interests.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother struggling with methamphetamine use appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son, claiming that termination is not in the best interest of the child and that her bond with the child warrants a permissive exception.  OPINION HOLDS: Even though the record shows the mother shared a “very strong and loving bond” with her son, she continued to use methamphetamine after close to two years of services.  We accordingly affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights on our de novo review of the record.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            A father challenges the termination of his parental rights, arguing (1) one of the statutory grounds for termination was not established; (2) termination was not in the child’s best interests; and (3) the juvenile court should have granted him a six-month extension to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review of the record, we affirm.