2025 Archive | Most Recent Court of Appeals Summaries

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (14 pages)

          A defendant appeals his convictions for three counts of attempted murder and two counts of willful injury causing serious injury.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State offered ample proof that Alcorn aided and abetted Rebecca and Robert Lyons in shooting at three victims, we find the court properly instructed the jury and substantial evidence supported the verdicts.  We find no abuse of discretion in the court’s sentencing decision.  We do not reach the merits of his evidentiary issue.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

          A defendant appeals her convictions for three counts of attempted murder and two counts of assault with intent to inflict serious injury.  She challenges the aiding-and-abetting jury instructions and contends the verdicts were against the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the state presented substantial evidence that she aided and abetted, and because she did not preserve error on her weight-of-the-evidence claim, we affirm.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (13 pages)

          A defendant appeals his convictions for three counts of attempted murder and two counts of willful injury causing serious injury.  He contends the district court erred in rejecting his justification defense and finding he aided and abetted in the commission of these crimes.  He also argues the verdicts were against the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record shows substantial evidence that he acted without justification and aided and abetted, and because he failed to preserve error on his weight-of-the-evidence claim, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Buller, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (11 pages)

            Christopher Abram appeals his conviction for willful injury causing serious injury and possession of a firearm as a felon.  Abram contends the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial on the basis that the verdicts were against the weight of the evidence.  He additionally argues the district court abused its discretion in admitting a challenged exhibit for lack of sufficient foundation and in denying his motion to strike a juror for cause.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not err or abuse its discretion, and Abram did not preserve error on his evidentiary challenge, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Shelby County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (26 pages)

            Robert Arkfeld appeals his conviction for serious injury by intoxicated operation of a motor vehicle.  He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress, the sufficiency of the evidence, the exclusion of evidence about the victim’s intoxication, and the district court’s refusal to give his proposed jury instructions on causation.  OPINION HOLDS: The court properly denied Arkfeld’s motion to suppress, and substantial evidence supports the jury’s conclusion that cocaine metabolites were present in Arkfeld’s system while he was operating the vehicle.  However, the State failed to present sufficient evidence that Arkfeld’s intoxicated operation caused the victim’s death.  Accordingly, we reverse Arkfeld’s conviction and remand for entry of judgment on the lesser-included offense of operating while intoxicated.  As a result, we do not reach the remaining evidentiary and instructional issues.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

          David Levy contends his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to resist the trial court’s decision to close the courtroom during a witness’s testimony and failing to object to statements during the State’s rebuttal closing argument that Levy was “dishonest.”  OPINION HOLDS: Neither challenge constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel, so we affirm denial of relief. 

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Zachary Hindman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (15 pages)

            Asa Starr appeals his convictions for first-degree robbery, assault while participating in a felony, and felon in possession of a firearm.  He challenges each conviction, asserting that (1) the evidence was insufficient to identify him as the robber; (2) the district court erred in overruling his objection to a witness’s in-court identification because it exceeded the scope of the minutes of testimony; and (3) the State improperly relied on a juvenile adjudication to prove that he was a felon in possession of a firearm.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports all of Starr’s convictions.  The minutes of testimony were sufficient to put Starr on notice of the possibility that the witness would identify him.  The district court also correctly interpreted the relevant statutory provisions regarding the admissibility of Starr’s juvenile adjudication to prove he was a felon in possession of a firearm.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals an adverse summary-judgment ruling finding her petition was barred by the statute of limitations.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we discern no legal error in the district court’s ruling, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals an adverse summary-judgment ruling on his defamation claim.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the statements at issue were a "supportable interpretation" of the events at issue and therefore not actionable in a defamation suit. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J. (8 pages)

            Randy Lee Patrie appeals his conviction for first-degree murder, arguing the State presented insufficient evidence of his guilt.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the evidence of Patrie’s guilt is overwhelming, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Michael Hooper, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J. (17 pages)

            A jury convicted Jesse Smith of sexual abuse in the third degree.  On appeal, Smith challenges (1) the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction, (2) the court’s decision to admit certain exhibits during trial, and (3) the court’s decision to allow certain testimony from the medical examiner during trial.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (7 pages)

            William Burton appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief following his 2019 conviction of second-degree murder.  Burton asserts six claims that his trial counsel was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Burton did not establish prejudice, his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims fail.  Accordingly, we affirm.

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

            Samuel Mendoza appeals his convictions for assault and child endangerment.  He argues there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions for either charge. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find substantial evidence supports Mendoza’s convictions for child endangerment and assault, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Gregg Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            Joseph Stetz appeals his sentences following a guilty plea.  He argues that the district court improperly relied on unproven offenses in the victim impact statement and that the relevant sentencing factors supported a sentence of probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of the district court’s discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monona County, Tod Deck, Judge. AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (3 pages)

            A postconviction-relief applicant appeals the dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant’s application did not allege any facts or provide any explanation as to why he could not have learned of the underlying facts supporting his claims within the three-year statute of limitations, the new-ground-of-fact exception to the statute of limitations does not apply.  The district court correctly dismissed the application as time-barred.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (5 pages)

          James Mathias appeals the denial of his postconviction relief petition, alleging his counsel was ineffective by not challenging the constitutionality of Iowa Code section 724.4B (2017).  OPINION HOLDS: Mathias’s appeal frames the constitutional challenge under an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.  Because the district court decided the constitutional challenge as a freestanding claim, error is not preserved, and we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Plaintiff appeals the dismissal of her petition for medical malpractice for failure to file a certificate of merit pursuant to Iowa Code section 147.140 (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly found that the plaintiff was required to provide expert testimony for her claims.  Thus, under Iowa Code section 147.140, she was required to file a certificate of merit.  Because the plaintiff failed to do so she failed to comply with Iowa Code section 147.140(6).  Her remaining claims are not preserved for our review.  We affirm the dismissal of her petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (6 pages)

            A joint property owner appeals from a partition decree, arguing that the division of sale proceeds was not equitable.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find that the district court equitably divided the sale proceeds of this jointly held property.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, John J. Haney, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A postconviction applicant appeals the denial of relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court considered the merits of applicant’s case, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Mark Fowler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (16 pages)

            Applicant appeals the dismissal and denial of claims in his application for postconviction relief.  He argues his actual-innocence claims should not have been dismissed.  Additionally, he argues his application should not have been denied because the State acted in bad faith when it destroyed critical biological evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because we find his actual-innocence claim was previously rejected in an earlier PCR challenge and that he failed to prove the State’s bad faith in destroying evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            Helena Dahnweih appeals the district court’s order affirming the Iowa Board of Nursing’s decision to revoke her nursing license.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s denial of Helena’s petition for judicial review.  We remand to the district court for (1) entry of an order reversing the board’s order revoking Helena’s nursing license and requiring her to pay fees and costs, and (2) determination of whether reasonable attorney fees can be awarded under Iowa Code section 625.29 (2023) upon Helena’s filing of an updated attorney fee affidavit.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Jason D. Besler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A defendant appeals adverse-summary judgment rulings.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in finding a genuine issue of material fact precluded granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.  As for the plaintiff’s motion, we affirm the court’s application of Iowa Code section 515A.9 (2023). 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jesse Ramirez, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Schumacher, Badding, and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J.  Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (19 pages)

            Cassidy Poage appeals her convictions for three counts of possession of a controlled substance, second offense, challenging the district court’s denial of her motion to suppress.  She argues that the police officer lacked reasonable suspicion to extend the traffic stop of the truck in which she was riding for a K-9 unit to arrive and conduct a drug-sniff.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court.  The evidence known to the officers provided reasonable suspicion of illegal drugs in the truck that justified extending the traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment and article I, section 8, of the Iowa Constitution.  We thus affirm the district court’s denial of the motion to suppress and Poage’s convictions.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent.  The constitutional analysis changed when the law enforcement officer told the occupants of the vehicle that they were free to leave.  If the officer had reasonable suspicion to prolong the stop after the traffic violation warning was complete, he was obligated to act on it.  And because the officer did not obtain any new indicia of criminal activity after ending the initial detention, the renewed detention was impermissible.  I would reverse the suppression ruling and remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Robert J. Richter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (6 pages)

            The defendant appeals her sentence, arguing the State breached the plea agreement.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon finding the State did not breach the plea agreement, we affirm the sentence as imposed. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Terry Rickers, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Per curiam.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Badding, J.  (13 pages)

            Janey Shafer appeals the district court’s summary judgment order finding Frank Santana immune from liability for injuries caused by Santana’s horses.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that Shafer’s injury occurred while she was participating in a domesticated animal activity, bringing this case within the scope of Iowa Code chapter 673 immunity.  But because a fact question remains as to whether Shafer’s injury was the product of recklessness, we reverse the grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I depart from my colleagues’ conclusion that a genuine issue of fact remains as to whether this case falls within the recklessness exception to chapter 673 immunity.  Because the summary judgment record suggests a question of negligence at most, I would affirm the district court’s order in its entirety.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED TO DETERMINE ATTORNEY FEES.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (19 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals an adverse ruling on his derivative and direct claims and requested injunctive relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the defendant acted reasonably and in good faith, we affirm and remand for the district court to determine reasonable appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, Craig M. Dreismeier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (17 pages)

            Morgan Prusha appeals the district court’s order upholding the validity of the premarital agreement she signed before marrying her now ex-husband, Jordan Prusha.  Morgan further argues that the district court improperly granted Jordan physical care of their two children.  She also argues the district court should have awarded her child support and spousal support.  And on appeal, she requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the premarital agreement was enforceable, and because we find no issues with the district court’s award of physical care to Jordan and the refusal to award Morgan child support or spousal support, we affirm.  We decline to grant appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, Eric J. Nelson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Jolynne Gill challenges the sufficiency of evidence supporting her convictions for delivery of psilocyn and delivery of LSD.  OPINION HOLDS: Because sufficient evidence supports Gill’s convictions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            The City of Colfax appeals the district court’s ruling granting summary judgement for the Teamsters Union in an employment dispute.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court correctly found the arbitrator was within her authority to find the termination was not warranted, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Elizabeth O'Donnell, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            Ryan Mosley appeals the district court’s order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, arguing that no enforceable alternative dispute resolution agreement existed within the waiver of liability he signed.  He further argues that his claims are not encompassed by the terms of the waiver of liability, and that the defendant organization’s bylaws do not apply to his claims.  OPINION HOLDS: Although an enforceable alternative dispute resolution agreement does exist within the terms of the waiver, the terms of the waiver do not encompass Mosley’s claims.  The district court erred in granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment.  Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings at the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Patrick H. Tott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (3 pages)

            Scott Tomlinson appeals the district court order denying his petition to vacate a dissolution of marriage decree.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (13 pages)

          Andrew Harland appeals the spousal support, physical care, and visitation provisions in the dissolution decree following his and Alyssa Harland’s divorce.  He asks us to reduce the amount and duration of spousal support owed to Alyssa and to grant him physical care, or to increase his visitation time.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court erred in finding the circumstances warranted awarding Alyssa all four types of spousal support, we modify the spousal support award, but we affirm the district court’s physical care and visitation provisions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Mark D. Fisher, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (6 pages)

            Thierry Munganga appeals from the denial of his petition for judicial review of an agency decision requiring him to repay an overpayment of unemployment benefits.  He argues that the unemployment-benefits filing process violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and that the statute requiring repayment of overpaid unemployment benefits violates due process as applied to him.  OPINION HOLDS: Munganga failed to preserve his claims related to Title VI.  He also failed to establish a due process violation.  Moreover, we cannot grant equitable relief to waive the statutorily required repayment obligation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            McKinley Dudley Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of postconviction relief, arguing he received ineffective assistance when his defense attorney allowed him to plead guilty to an enhanced charge without a full understanding of the potential penalties.  OPINION HOLDS: Contrary to Dudley’s allegation, we find he was fully advised about his habitual-offender enhancement prior to entering his guilty plea, and so we are unconvinced that Dudley would not have proceeded but for counsel’s alleged errors.  Because Dudley cannot show the necessary prejudice, we affirm the denial of postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Langholz, J.  (27 pages)

            An employee appeals and his employer cross-appeals the district court’s judicial review order, which affirmed the workers’ compensation commissioner’s award of benefits.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record supports the agency’s award of permanent partial disability benefits and alternate medical care for Koeller’s injuries, we affirm.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I concur in the court’s opinion addressing the cross-appeal.  But I dissent from the part of the opinion addressing Kevin Koeller’s appeal of the permanent-partial-disability award.  The workers’ compensation commissioner erred in his interpretation of the American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment and thus violated Iowa Code section 85.34(2)(x) (2022) by failing to use “solely” the AMA Guides to determine Koeller’s “percentage of permanent impairment.”  And so, I would reverse the commissioner’s interpretation of the AMA Guides and the resulting impairment rating and benefits award and remand for the commissioner to make a new finding of Koeller’s permanent impairment using an accurate interpretation of the AMA Guides.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Justin R. Wyatt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            Katrina Hammermeister appeals the district court’s order placing legal custody and physical care of her two minor children with their father, Shannon Hammermeister.  On appeal, Katrina contends that the district court erred by not granting her request to award joint legal custody and shared physical care of the children.  Additionally, Shannon requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the record before us, we affirm the district court’s order awarding Shannon sole legal custody and physical care of the children.  We deny Shannon’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            An employer appeals an adverse judicial-review ruling following proceedings before the workers’ compensation commissioner.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is substantial evidence to support the commissioner's rulings on both the rate-of-pay and penalty-benefits issues, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Eric J. Nelson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            Rochelle Straight appeals from the decree dissolving her marriage to Duane Straight.  Rochelle challenges the district court’s property division, arguing it failed to equitably divide the assets and debts of the marriage.  OPINION HOLDS: On review, we affirm the district court’s decree.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Peter B. Newell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2025).  She contests the grounds for termination, argues termination is not in the child’s best interests, and contends that the permissive exception should apply given her strong bond with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (5 pages)

            Tyler Patterson appeals his sentence for first-degree theft.  He argues that the district court failed to adequately explain its reasons for his sentence and abused its discretion by selecting a prison sentence rather than a suspended sentence with probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court adequately explained its sentencing reasons and did not abuse its considerable sentencing discretion in selecting the sentence, we affirm.

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

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his two children, K.D. and W.D., pursuant to Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2025).  He argues the juvenile court improperly burden shifted and that termination is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the juvenile court did not shift the burden and termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, Joseph B. McCarville, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals from a permanency review order placing his son with out-of-state relatives, anticipating the establishment of a guardianship.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a child born in 2024.  OPINION HOLDS: The grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2025) have been established by clear and convincing evidence, and termination is in the child’s best interests.  The father fails to show that termination will be detrimental to the child based on the closeness of the parent-child bond.  The evidence does not support a finding that the result of the proceedings would be different if termination was delayed for six months, and a guardianship is not in the child’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to A.B., pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (l) (2025).  She contests the grounds for termination and argues termination is not in A.B.’s best interests given their strong bond and the mother’s recent progress.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two daughters under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (h).  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination and contends termination is not in the girls’ best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find that the mother remained unable to meet all her children’s needs at the time of termination.  We also agree with the juvenile court’s conclusion that termination is in the best interests of these girls.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph McCarville, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, challenging the statutory grounds authorizing termination, claiming the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification, arguing a permissive exception should be applied, and maintaining her right to counsel was violated due to the “current statutory court-appointed hourly rate.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because A.R. and J.R. cannot be safely returned to their parents’ care at the time of the termination trial, and because termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2025).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (16 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to one child.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review of the record, we affirm termination as to both parents.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two of her children.  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, claims termination is not in the children’s best interests, argues a permissive exception to termination applies, and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Patrick J. McAvan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court’s entry of a bridge modification order and its order finding reasonable efforts for reunification were made.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

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

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (f) (2025).  He argues (1) termination of his parental rights are not in the best interests of the child and (2) termination would be detrimental to the child due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, termination was in the best interests of the child and the father did not preserve error on his requests for a permissive exception or additional time.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Matthew A. Schuling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  She challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination and whether termination is in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The child could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying a statutory ground for termination.  And termination is in the child’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, Ashley West-Joons, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She argues (1) termination of her parental rights is not in the child’s best interests and (2) the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests and the mother failed to preserve her claim on the application of a permissive exception for review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Davis County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            A mother and father both appeal the termination of their parental rights to their son.  OPINION HOLDS: We have appellate jurisdiction over the mother’s appeal despite her delay in filing the notice of appeal with the district court clerk.  The State proved a statutory ground for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) because the son could not be safely returned to the father’s custody—and the mother does not challenge that ground.  Termination is in the best interest of the son—any detriment from severing the parent-child bond does not outweigh the benefit from the son staying in his loving home with his grandmother and sibling.  And given the son’s young age and the mother’s lack of sustained progress, a guardianship is not the best choice for the son’s safety and stability.  We thus affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Cole Michael Johnson appeals his convictions after pleading guilty to four charges.  OPINION HOLDS: Johnson was adequately advised of the requirement of filing a motion in arrest of judgment to challenge his guilty plea and waived this right to do so, which precludes him from challenging his pleas on appeal.  Because Johnson has not established good cause to pursue his appeal as a matter of right, we have no jurisdiction over the appeal and must dismiss it.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason A. Burns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Greer, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (8 pages)

            Seven Divine appeals his convictions and sentences after pleading guilty to possession of ammunition as a domestic violence offender, domestic abuse assault, and first-degree harassment.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Ahlers, Badding, and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  Special Concurrence by Buller, J. Dissent by Greer, J. (25 pages)

            In a medical malpractice suit, the medical providers bring this interlocutory appeal and ask us to hold that Iowa Code chapter 668 (2020) applies to compare the fault of the medical providers with the fault of the released third-party jet ski defendants.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find that DeMoss v. Hamilton, 644 N.W.2d 302 (Iowa 2002), lends guidance, we hold chapter 668 does not apply to these facts.  We reverse and remand the district court’s decision.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: Because I believe DeMoss v. Hamilton, 644 N.W.2d 302 (Iowa 2002) strongly nudges us to reverse, and the supreme court has not yet adopted section 35 of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, I specially concur.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectively dissent from the majority opinion because I do not think DeMoss prohibits what the medical providers seek to accomplish, thus we need not extend or overrule its holding or even engage in that exercise.  I disagree with the majority finding that this malpractice action is a separate “claim” and so would find that Iowa Code chapter 668 applies here.  And under the reasoning of Jahn and section 35 of the Restatement (Third), I would apply those evolving legal concepts so that the appropriate defendant, including the released party, is responsible for its share of the enhanced injury.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Franklin County, Rustin T. Davenport, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            David Baugh appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief.  He contends that the prosecutor’s subsequent criminal conviction for sexual abuse casts doubt on to the prosecutor’s actions in his own case.  Baugh does not claim innocence but argues instead that the plea negotiations were tainted by the prosecutor’s “unclean hands.”  OPINION HOLDS: Baugh’s claim fails because he has not shown how the prosecutor’s conduct was material to his decision to plead guilty.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of his postconviction-relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Carlos Hivento appeals his sentence for third-degree sexual abuse, arguing the district court abused its discretion by imposing a consecutive term of imprisonment without adequate reasons and by ordering that Hivento complete sex-offender treatment while incarcerated.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision to impose a consecutive sentence.  However, we agree with both parties that the court lacked statutory authority to order sex-offender treatment.  We vacate that part of Hivento’s sentence and remand for entry of a corrected sentencing order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt and Rustin Davenport, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher, Chicchelly, Langholz, and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  Dissent by Sandy, J.  (25 pages)

            Rickie Withers Sr. appeals his convictions and sentences for four counts of second-degree sexual abuse and three counts of third-degree sexual abuse.  Withers challenges the district court’s decision to allow the guardian ad litem to sit next to a child witness during the child’s testimony; claims the court abused its discretion by denying his motion to continue when the prosecutor “provided late notice of additional witnesses and evidence”; and argues the court abused its discretion by imposing consecutive sentences without giving appropriate consideration to “his age and medical conditions.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review of the claims properly before us, we affirm Withers’ convictions and sentences.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I would hold the district court abused its discretion by denying Withers’ motion to continue trial and prejudiced him.  I therefore respectfully dissent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Jason Hocking appeals his conviction for robbery in the first degree, arguing insufficient evidence supported his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Sufficient evidence was presented to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Hocking committed robbery in the first degree, and we thus affirm his conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            Reynolds appeals the denial of his postconviction-relief application from two convictions for lascivious acts with a child.  He alleges ineffective assistance of counsel and actual innocence. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of relief because Reynolds failed to preserve error for his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and he failed to prove actual innocence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark and Samantha Gronewald, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Nicolas Aragon Jr. and Regina Ward appeal a grant of summary judgment for the defendants.  They allege the district court erred in dismissing (1) their negligence claim because Aragon was a trespasser and (2) the breach-of-contract claim because the plaintiffs did not have third-party beneficiary rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the record demonstrates Aragon was a trespasser and the plaintiffs did not have third-party beneficiary rights, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            An applicant for postconviction relief appeals the denial of relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the alleged breaches of duty did not prejudice the applicant, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Jennifer Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (19 pages)

            Thirteen property owners in the City of Jefferson appeal the district court’s dismissal of their petition for a writ of certiorari challenging the city council’s decision to rezone a parcel of land.  They argue that the court erred in holding that their petition failed to plead sufficient facts showing their standing to challenge the rezoning decision and that it abused its discretion in not letting them amend their petition to allege more facts to cure any deficiency.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of standing because the mere ownership of property in the city—none of which was alleged to be near the rezoned property—does not show a specific personal or legal interest that has been or is imminently likely to be harmed by the rezoning decision.  And the property owners’ second argument—that the court should have let them amend their petition—is not preserved for our review.  They did not raise this issue to the district court before its dismissal ruling by making a written or oral motion for leave to amend—suggesting at oral argument that they “could amend” the petition “if the Court wishes” is not a motion.  What’s more, they could have filed an amended petition—without needing the court’s permission—at any time in the two months between the city moving to dismiss and the court’s dismissal ruling.  But they chose not to do so.  And asking the court to reconsider its dismissal order to permit an amended petition is too late to raise this new issue.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because I believe the property owners made a contingent request for leave to amend, and so the district court erred in dismissing the petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral arguments by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Richard Siemer appeals from the summary dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief.  He asserts that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether phone records constitute a new ground of fact that could not have been raised within three years of his conviction; the statute of limitations should be tolled by the relation-back doctrine established in Allison v. State, 914 N.W.2d 866 (Iowa 2018); and the 2019 amendment to Iowa Code section 822.3 violates both the equal protection clause and the due process clause of the federal and Iowa constitutions.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the summary dismissal of Siemer’s second application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (14 pages)

            Phil Mausser appeals a bench trial ruling finding him liable for unjust enrichment for unpaid hay deliveries.  On appeal, Mausser challenges the admission of scale tickets alleged to show the quantity of hay delivered.  He also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the court’s award.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject the evidentiary challenge but grant partial relief on the merits following our de novo review.  While we agree with the district court’s award as to some of the hay deliveries, the evidence linking other loads to Mausser is too conjectural to hold him liable.  We accordingly vacate the judgment against Mausser for those loads and remand for entry of a corrected judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, Myron Gookin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Donna Peterson, the executor of Dennis Peterson’s estate, appeals the probate court ruling setting priority over estate funds in favor of Joe Parcell, an estate beneficiary, arguing the estate is insolvent and any leftover funds must be paid towards an Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) probate claim for medical expenses.  OPINION HOLDS: Because HHS filed a release and satisfaction of its probate claim against the estate, the probate court properly ordered the executor to pay any remaining sums available in the estate to Parcell.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, John Bauercamper, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

            Tyler and Noelle Hansen appeal a district court decree finding that their neighbors proved their claim of adverse possession.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm as modified because we find the district court’s reliance on Iowa Code chapter 650 (2019) is misplaced.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (10 pages)

            On appeal from his conviction for operating while intoxicated, Terry Schmitz challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence from the traffic stop.  Schmitz contends the officer did not have probable cause to stop the vehicle because the officer made a mistake of law about the speed limit.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude that Schmitz’s driving fifty-two miles per hour violated the forty-five-miles-per-hour maximum mandated by Iowa Code section 321.285(2)(a)(3) (2023), the default speed limit for suburban districts within a city, giving the officer probable cause to initiate the stop.  That the trooper may have been mistaken in his belief that the lawful speed limit was twenty-five miles per hour does not alter our conclusion.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Terry Rickers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Robert Church appeals the order denying his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Church failed to show he would not have pled guilty and would have insisted on going to trial if he had been informed that his conviction would result in a lifetime requirement to register with the sex offender registry, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Jermaine Carter Jr. appeals his convictions for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver, possession of a controlled substance, interference with official acts–firearm, possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, and person ineligible to carry dangerous weapons.  Carter claims the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress because “the objective facts” known to police did not “rise to the level of reasonable suspicion necessary to justify the warrantless seizure of Carter and his vehicle.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we conclude even if the seizure was unreasonable, Carter’s resistance to arrest provided an independent basis to search, resulting in the discovery of methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana, and a firearm.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Jason D. Besler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            Will contestants appeal the probate court’s orders dismissing their claims and declaring the will’s in terrorem clause to be enforceable.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the will contestants waited more than thirty days to appeal following the probate court’s dismissal of their claims challenging the will, we are without subject matter jurisdiction to consider their related claims on appeal.  On the remaining issue, the will contestants failed to create a question of material fact as to whether they challenged the will in good faith or with probable cause, so the probate court correctly concluded that the in terrorem clause of the will should be enforced.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J. (6 pages)

            Garrett Michael Condon alleges that the district court abused its discretion by considering an improper factor in its imposition of a prison sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion by considering an improper factor in sentencing, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, DeDra Schroeder, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (10 pages)

            A father appeals the modification of a marriage dissolution decree granting physical care to the mother and dismissing his contempt application.  Both parties seek appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s award of physical care to the mother because it is in the best interests of the children.  The district court acted with appropriate discretion in not finding the mother in contempt.  And we decline to award either party appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (10 pages)

            An injured state employee appeals the dismissal of his petition for lack of particularity and plausibility.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the dismissal of the petition was in error based on existing precedent.  And we find no error in the district court’s rejection of the alternative grounds urged for affirmance of the dismissal.  Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

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

            Kentrall Barnes appeals his sentence for operating while intoxicated (OWI), third offense.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when imposing Barnes’s sentence, and it provided adequate rationale for ordering Barnes to serve his sentence for OWI, third offense, consecutively to his sentence in another case after it revoked his probation in that separate case. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Ashley Beisch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (8 pages)

            Erik Finsand appeals his conviction for indecent exposure–masturbation alternative, a serious misdemeanor, arising from acts of self-stimulation in a Walmart store.  Finsand challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the district court’s finding of guilt following a bench trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (6 pages)

            Mackenzie Herron appeals the sentence following her guilty plea to child endangerment resulting in bodily injury.  She claims the court failed to provide reasoning for denying a deferred judgment, placed undue emphasis on the nature of the offense, and improperly considered uncharged conduct mentioned in a victim impact statement.  OPINION HOLDS: The record shows that the court considered appropriate sentencing factors and provided sufficient explanation for the sentence imposed.  Accordingly, we affirm Herron’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Dustin Hite, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (14 pages)

            Kurtis Chickering contends the district court erred by denying his petition to modify the physical care provisions of his dissolution decree, arguing that the relocation of his former wife, Ellen Chickering, constituted a substantial and unanticipated change in circumstances.  He also argues that the district court miscalculated child support through improper income findings for both parties and that it improperly questioned the credibility of his testimony.  He further contends the district court erred by failing to increase his parenting time.  Ellen seeks an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s credibility determinations, determination of the parties’ income, denial of Kurtis’s petition to modify, as well as its denial of Kurtis’s request for increased visitation through his motion to enlarge.  But because Ellen did not submit an appellate attorney fee affidavit, we remand to the district court to award Ellen appellate attorney fees in an amount it deems reasonable.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey C. McDaniel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Donald Dickerson III appeals his sentence for possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver arguing that he should have received a deferred judgment rather than a suspended sentence and probation.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its considerable sentencing discretion in selecting a suspended sentence and probation rather than a deferred judgment.  We thus affirm Dickerson’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.   Opinion by Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children, challenging some of the statutory grounds and arguing that she should have been given six more months to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother challenges only some of the independent statutory grounds for termination relied on by the juvenile court, so we could not reverse on that basis and do not reach the merits of her argument.  After the mother had already obtained one six-month extension, we agree with the juvenile court that the need for termination will still exist after six more months.  We thus affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to all three children. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Matthew A. Schuling, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (12 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights, arguing the state failed to prove grounds for termination and failed to prove termination is in the children’s best interests.  They also contend the State failed to provide reasonable reunification efforts and that the court should have granted them an extension to reunite with their children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the State met its burden of proof, the parents failed to preserve their reasonable-efforts claim, and the court did not err in denying them an extension, we affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie Talkington, Judge.  AFFIRMED  ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (12 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find termination is in the best interests of the children.  The State met its burden to terminate the mother’s rights under the statute.  The juvenile court did not err in not invoking a permissive exception or extension of time in the mother’s case.  The father waived his challenges to the statutory grounds.  And a guardianship was not in the best interests of the children.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Emmet County, Ann M. Gales, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights to their three children.  The father claims (1) the State failed to establish a statutory ground for termination, in part because the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services did not make reasonable efforts toward reunification, (2) his bonds with the children should have precluded termination, and (3) the juvenile court should have given him additional time to work toward reunification.  The mother only challenges whether termination is in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination, and the father waived his reasonable-efforts challenge.  The father’s bonds with the children are not of such magnitude to warrant application of a permissive exception to forgo termination, and we do not grant him any additional time to work toward reunification.  Termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (9 pages)

            James Horace Jr. appeals his conviction for second-degree sexual abuse, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.  He argues the record fails to support the district court’s finding that the abuse took place in Black Hawk County.  He also challenges the court’s decision to credit the victim’s version of events.  OPINION HOLDS: Even if venue were an essential element of Horace’s crime, we would find the State met its burden to establish the offense occurred in Black Hawk County.  Furthermore, because it was the district court’s prerogative to credit the victim’s testimony over Horace’s, we find substantial evidence supports the verdict.  We therefore affirm Horace’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered en banc without oral argument.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Buller, J.  Sandy, J., specially concurs; Tabor, C.J., specially concurs with Schumacher, Ahlers, and Badding, JJ. joining.  (25 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions on three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, and the State asks this court to overrule State v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 101 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993).  OPINION HOLDS: We expressly overrule Smith, finding this court misapplied the standards of appellate review.  And we affirm Lang’s convictions as supported by substantial evidence.  SANDY SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I write separately to clarify that I would narrow the scope of the majority’s reasoning in overruling Smith.  TABOR SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I agree with the result reached by the main decision because the testimony of Z.S. provided substantial evidence to support the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.  But I disagree with the extra step of overruling a three-decades-old outlier case.  Overruling State v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 101 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993), is unnecessary to resolve Lang’s appeal.  And doing so undermines the due-process review required by Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 316 (1979).  Honoring the principle of judicial restraint, I would reject the State’s request to overrule Smith.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Shawn Showers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (11 pages)

            Wardlow appeals the denial of her motion for new trial for her medical malpractice suit.  She alleges various court rulings over expert testimony and evidentiary issues materially affected her substantial rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find she failed to prove how her substantial rights were affected and because many alleged errors were harmless, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Kiranmai Yarlagadda appeals the decree dissolving her marriage with Venkata Yarlagadda.  She argues that the property division was inequitable and that she should have been awarded traditional spousal support rather than only five years of rehabilitative spousal support.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree that the district court equitably divided the marital property.  But given the parties’ twenty-two year marriage, disparity in their incomes, Kiranmai’s limited earning capacity and long-standing financial dependence on Venkata, and Kiranmai’s sacrifice of her medical career to be with Venkata, a traditional-spousal-support award is required to do equity between the parties.  We thus affirm the decree as modified.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            Robert and Alisha Orton appeal the terms of their dissolution decree.  Robert appeals the calculation of his annual income and the spousal support awarded to Alisha.  Alisha cross-appeals, arguing the district court should have awarded a property equalization payment or otherwise asks us to find the premarital agreement unenforceable.  Alisha further requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court and remand for a determination of appellate attorney fees.

            Certiorari from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Rustin Davenport, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Christine Luna, through writ of certiorari, appeals the amount of restitution ordered by the district court.  Luna claims that the district court erred because the amount of restitution it ordered was not supported by substantial evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: There was substantial evidence for the district court to order $15,117 in restitution.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Greer, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Buller, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (10 pages)

            Jamodd Sallis appeals his conviction of sexual abuse in the third degree, enhanced as a habitual offender.  He claims the district court erred by denying him the right to counsel by failing to appoint him new counsel or inquire into the breakdown in his attorney-client relationship.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court dedicated significant time inquiring into the relationship breakdown and Sallis never requested substitute counsel, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Katie Ranes, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (14 pages)

            A decedent’s spouse appeals a declaratory judgment ruling denying her spousal share claim to assets in a Panamanian private interest foundation (PIF) established by the decedent before his death.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because a Panamanian PIF is not a revocable trust and thus is not in the list assets under Iowa Code section 633.238(1).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Stephanie C. Rattenborg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (3 pages)

            Traci Chamberlain seeks discretionary review of the district court’s ruling affirming both her simple misdemeanor convictions for violations of a no-contact order.  She claims the district court could not have conducted a full and fair review of the record because the magistrate failed to forward the necessary parts of the record required by Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.72(3).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because Chamberlain failed to show that the district court did not have the applicable record available to it.  And even if the district court did not have the applicable record, Chamberlain failed to preserve error on the issue.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Decatur County, Patrick W. Greenwood, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (4 pages)

            Trenton Barnett challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions for criminal mischief in the third degree and trespass causing damage.  OPINION HOLDS: Barnett’s convictions are supported by substantial evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Christopher Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (5 pages)

            Jesus Hernandez appeals his conviction of attempted murder.  Hernandez contends the district court should have suppressed the self-inculpatory statement he made to law enforcement because he was not given a Miranda warning, violating his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no basis for suppressing the challenged statement, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (4 pages)

            Inmate Michael Lajeunesse appeals the dismissal of his petition for judicial review under Iowa Code section 17A.19 (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: Lajeunesse seeks review of an agency determination that our legislature has expressly made unreviewable.  We therefore affirm the denial of relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Crystal S. Cronk and Shawn Showers, Judges.  DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT CONDITIONALLY AFFIRMED; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Per Curiam.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            James Calvin Jr. appeals from his convictions, judgment, and sentences for possession of methamphetamine, failure to affix a drug tax stamp, and operating while intoxicated.  Calvin asserts the district court should have dismissed his case on speedy trial grounds, the district court applied the wrong standard when assessing his motion for new trial, and the court imposed the fines in effect at the time of sentencing rather than those in effect at the time of the offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Since Calvin waived his right to a speedy trial we affirm the district court’s ruling on Calvin’s motion to dismiss.  But we remand to the district court for entry of a ruling on Calvin’s motion for new trial applying the proper weight-of-the-evidence standard.  And conditioned on that ruling on the motion for new trial, we also remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because Calvin failed to bring the district court’s application of the incorrect standard to the district court’s attention, I would hold that error is not preserved for our review on that issue.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Louisa County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            Bradley Bell appeals from the decree requiring him to pay Stacy Bell a property equalization payment, spousal support, and attorney fees.  Stacy Bell cross-appeals from the decree, arguing she is entitled to a larger equalization payment and a larger sum of attorney fees, and requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: After a de novo review, we affirm the district court’s order of an equalization payment and district court attorney fees.  We modify the dissolution decree to eliminate the award of spousal support, and remand for a determination of appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            Litigants appeal orders denying a motion to tax costs and a late post-trial motion to amend the pleadings.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in either motion, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (21 pages)

            Enterprise Products Operating, LLC appeals the district court’s ruling on judicial review affirming the Iowa Utilities Commission’s imposition of civil penalties totaling $1.8 million for nine violations of Iowa Code chapter 479B (2023)’s permit requirements for interstate hazardous liquid pipelines and underground storage facilities.  Enterprise argues that the Commission: (1) erred in deciding that Enterprise’s pipeline system required nine permits—rather than just one—and thus that Enterprise committed nine violations of the permit requirements every day rather than just a single violation; (2) lacked authority to impose a civil penalty of more than $200,000 because the nine violations were a “related series of violations” under Iowa Code section 479B.21(1); and (3) violated article I, section 6 of the Iowa Constitution “by imposing a substantially larger penalty against Enterprise than for similarly situated pipeline and utilities companies.”  OPINION HOLDS: We cannot consider Enterprise’s first claim because it did not preserve error on that issue before the Commission or the district court.  The Commission correctly interpreted section 479B.21(1) to only cap the total amount for the series of daily $1000 penalties for ongoing violations authorized in the statute’s immediately preceding sentence—rather than all related violations as Enterprise urges.  And the Commission’s civil penalty did not violate article I, section 6 because Enterprise did not receive different treatment than similarly situated companies.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, John J. Haney, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (8 pages)

            Alec Jones appeals his conviction for first-degree murder, claiming the evidence was insufficient to establish that the shooting of his father was not justified.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Amy Zacharias, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Julie Monday appeals a judgment in favor of Jim Lovely and WWJD Enterprises, LLC arising from a real estate dispute. She alleges a valid contract existed for the sale of a home and seeks specific performance. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the parties never formed a contract, we affirm the district court’s judgment in favor of Lovely.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kristen Formanek, Judge.  CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            Sammi Thurman appeals her conviction and sentence following her guilty plea to child endangerment.  She claims the district court erred by relying on her stipulation that she violated her probation without determining whether her violations were willful and by failing to impose a fine in its oral sentencing pronouncement but then imposing the minimum fine in its written judgment entry.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Thurman waived her first challenge, we do not address its merits.  We grant the parties’ request to vacate the fine imposed by the court and remand for resentencing on that issue only.

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

            A plaintiff appeals the district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to file a certificate of merit in compliance with Iowa Code section 147.140 (2023), asserting the defendants waived their right to file a motion to dismiss and that the statute is unconstitutionally void for vagueness.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard at oral arguments by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (14 pages)

            Defendants appeal a bench trial ruling finding them liable for unjust enrichment and the damage calculation.  Plaintiffs cross-appeal a finding there was no breach of contract and the unjust enrichment damage calculation.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the appeal and cross appeal. 

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

            Richard Allen Sharples appeals the district court’s sentencing order, arguing the sentence was illegal.  He further argues that the district court abused its discretion by considered improper factors at sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court did not impose an illegal sentence, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion by considering improper factors at sentencing.  We thus affirm the district court. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  Dissent by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            Ashlea Teter appeals the denial of her second petition to modify the physical care provisions of the decree resolving issues of child custody, support, and visitation of the child she shares with Javonte Hines-Miller.  OPINION HOLDS: Although a new incident of domestic violence is a change of circumstances relating to the child’s welfare, the child was not present during it and there is no evidence that it adversely affected him.  Because Ashlea failed to meet her burden of showing that she can provide superior care, we must affirm.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Javonte’s continued acts of domestic violence present a great enough threat to the child’s safety and development that Ashlea’s basic display of stability demonstrates her superior ability to minister to the needs of the child, and I would thus modify physical care to place the child with Ashlea.  I respectfully dissent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            Zachary Hunt appeals from his conviction for possession or carrying of a dangerous weapon while under the influence.  Hunt contends there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction and the district court erred in refusing his requested jury instruction.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient evidence to support his conviction and no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Mark D. Fisher, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            An applicant appeals from the district court’s denial of his postconviction-relief application wherein the district court found trial counsel was not ineffective and no structural error existed.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wayne County, Elisabeth Reynoldson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A self-represented mother appeals a decree placing physical care of two children with their father.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the mother did not preserve error on two of her claims and we agree with the court’s best-interests analysis, we affirm.

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

            Sebastian Landrum appeals his sentences for dominion or control of a firearm by a felon and possession of a controlled substance, marijuana, second offense.  He argues that the district court abused its discretion by failing to adequately explain its reasons for the sentences, relying on only a single factor, and selecting the prison sentences rather than suspended sentences with probation.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court adequately explained its sentencing reasons, properly considered multiple factors, and did not abuse its considerable sentencing discretion in selecting concurrent prison sentences.  We thus affirm Landrum’s sentences.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I write separately to explain my persistent use of the legal-citation parenthetical “(cleaned up)” despite the contrary guidance of the latest edition of The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation.  In short, (cleaned up) is worth saving.  And I hope that the bench and the bar will not be bullied by the Bluebook into letting it die.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt L. Wilke, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (9 pages)

            A parent appeals the district court’s denial of her petition to modify physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s parenting schedule modification and determination no substantial change of circumstances to warrant a change in physical care.  And we deny the parent’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            An employer and its insurance carrier appeal the district court order reversing the workers’ compensation commissioner’s denial of an employee’s claims for benefits.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the entire record before the agency, we agree with the district court’s conclusion that the agency’s causation finding is not supported by substantial evidence.  We also agree that the agency erred by placing the burden on the employee to show he provided notice of his injury rather than requiring the defendants to prove lack of notice as an affirmative defense.  We therefore affirm the judicial review ruling.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (21 pages)

            Mecene Laguerre appeals the district court’s ruling on judicial review affirming the workers’ compensation commissioner’s decision that his skin injury, which was limited to his right arm and leg, was a scheduled injury under paragraph “t” of Iowa Code section 85.34(2) rather than an unscheduled injury under paragraph “v.”  He argues that the court incorrectly interpreted section 85.34(2) because any non-face-or-head skin injury is always unscheduled as a matter of law.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that the commissioner did not err.  None of Laguerre’s arguments overcomes the longstanding judicial and agency precedent—recently reaffirmed by our supreme court—that injuries like these to the skin must be evaluated case-by-case to determine whether the injury is localized to a scheduled body part or extends to the whole body.  We thus affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Joel W. Barrows, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Courtney Ashby appeals the sentencing imposed after pleading guilty to theft in the second degree and extortion.  She alleges the district court abused its discretion in denying her request for probation and sentencing her to prison.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court did not rely on improper sentencing factors in imposing a prison sentence, we affirm Ashby’s sentences.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            Plaintiffs appeal an adverse summary-judgment ruling concerning Iowa’s recreational-land-use statutes.  OPINION HOLDS: Treating the notice of appeal as an application for interlocutory appeal, and construing the recreational-use statutes in favor of the landowner, we affirm the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason A. Burns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (6 pages)

            Justin Meade appeals the guilty plea and sentence for his conviction of harassment in the first degree.  He argues that his guilty plea was not knowing or voluntary and that the district court abused its discretion by declining to suspend his sentence despite mitigating factors.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Meade did not file a motion in arrest of judgment, his challenge to the validity of his guilty plea is not preserved for appellate review.  The record reflects that the district court considered all appropriate sentencing factors, including mitigating and aggravating circumstances.  Accordingly, we affirm Meade’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (9 pages)

            The plaintiffs challenge the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendants. They allege the district court erred when it granted summary judgment on (1) their claim of insufficient notice under Iowa Code section 21.4(1) (2023), (2) their claims requesting removal of members of the city council, and (3) joinder of the claims on the court’s own motion. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment relating to the notice under the Iowa Open Meetings Law and the mandatory joinder of the cases.  And we vacate the dismissal of the removal claims under Iowa Code section 21.6(2).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (3 pages)

            Clayton Shaw appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of heroin with intent to deliver as an habitual offender.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when it sentenced Shaw to a term of incarceration. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, Kristal L. Phillips, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, arguing that a custodial order should govern and avoid the termination of her parental rights and that the father did not meet his burden to prove abandonment.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we affirm, finding the father established a ground for termination, that the mother abandoned the child as is defined in Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2024), and that it is in the best interest of the child to terminate the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monroe County, Michael Carpenter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral arguments by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            Parks Finishing C7, LLC and Parks Finishing C8, LLC claim the district court incorrectly interpreted the termination provisions of two manure easement agreements when it concluded that an eighteen-month termination option applied to the initial and continuing terms of the agreements.  On appeal, they contend the court erred (1) by applying the last preceding antecedent rule because the termination clause is unambiguous; (2) in the manner it applied the rule even if it is applicable; and (3) by interpreting the termination clause in such a way as to render part of it superfluous.  OPINION HOLDS: Because an exception to the last precedent antecedent rule applies, the district court properly applied that exception, and the district court’s interpretation did not make any part of the termination clause superfluous, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (2 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We accept the State’s concession that the district court erred in ordering the defendant complete sex-offender treatment and reverse and remand with instructions.  As to his abuse of discretion claim, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Angie Johnston, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the district court’s denial of her petition to terminate a father’s parental rights to their child under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2024).  She claims the court erred in determining she failed to prove the father abandoned the child and termination of the father’s parental rights was in the child’s best interests.  The mother also challenges the court’s order denying her counsel access to child-in-need-of-assistance files involving the father’s other child.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we reverse the district court’s order and remand with directions to enter an order terminating the father’s parental rights consistent with this opinion.

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

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights as to all three of her children under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024) and as to two of the children under section 232.116(1)(d), (f), and (i).  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the juvenile court properly terminated the mother’s parental rights.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the dispositional order confirming the adjudications in child-in-need-of-assistance proceedings involving her six- and one-year-old daughters.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal termination of their parental rights to four and three children respectively.  OPINION HOLDS: We find termination of parental rights to be in the children’s best interests, and the children could not return to either parent’s care at the time of trial.  The court did not err in declining to invoke a permissive exception in either parent’s case.  The father’s close-bond exception claim was waived.  We affirm on both appeals.

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

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights.  She claims the State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence the child could not be returned to her custody at the time of the termination trial; the juvenile court’s best-interests determination was in error; and the juvenile court should have granted her a six-month extension.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because the grounds for termination were supported by clear and convincing evidence, the juvenile court was sufficiently detailed in its best-interests analysis, and there is no credible evidence that the mother would be able to resume custody of the child at the end of a six-month extension.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Kossuth County, Ann M. Gales, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son.  The father challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, claims termination is not in the child’s best interests, requests an extension of time for reunification services, asserts a permissive exception should be applied to preclude termination, and argues the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.    

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Andrew Smith, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (18 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to three children, arguing that termination is not in the children’s best interests.  The oldest child also appeals the termination of the mother’s parental rights to him.  He argues that (1) he was denied effective assistance of counsel and due process because of the delay in the appointment of counsel separate from his guardian ad litem; (2) the State failed to prove a statutory ground for termination; and (3) the juvenile court should have applied one of the permissive statutory exceptions to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court.  The oldest child was not deprived of due process or the effective assistance of counsel at the June 2025 termination hearing.  The State proved a statutory ground for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024) as to the oldest child because he could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing.  And we decline to apply any permissive statutory exception to forgo termination of the mother’s rights to the oldest child.  As for the mother’s appeal, termination is in the children’s best interests because, although the children share strong bonds with the mother, she cannot provide the care and stability that each child requires.  We thus affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2025) were proved as to both parents, termination is in the children’s best interests, and another argument was not preserved, we affirm the termination of their parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Joseph L. Tofilon, Judge (temporary removal hearing) and Joseph McCarville (dispositional hearing), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother challenges the juvenile court’s temporary and dispositional orders granting removal of her four children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the juvenile court’s dispositional order moots the mother’s challenge to temporary removal, we do not reach that claim of error.  As for the dispositional order, we affirm the juvenile court’s order given the potential risk for adjudicatory harm if the children return to the mother at this time.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, challenging each of the three steps in our termination analysis and requesting an extension of time.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no reversible error, we affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to two children, arguing termination was not in their best interests absent a clear plan for their long-term placement or adoption.  OPINION HOLDS: Despite the present uncertainty, we find that termination of parental rights will better advance the goal of permanency and is ultimately in the best interests of these children.  We therefore affirm.

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because clear and convincing evidence shows the grounds for terminating the mother’s parental rights under section 232.116(1)(g) (2025) and termination will not be detrimental to the child, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Jerrid Winfrey appeals the dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding Winfrey’s application barred by the statutory limitations period, we affirm.

            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 Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

            Andrew Brewer appeals his conviction following a jury trial of sexual abuse in the second degree.  Brewer claims that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction and that his right to speedy trial was violated.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, and because he did not preserve his speedy trial issue, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Alice Coon appeals the sentence imposed on her conviction for possession of a controlled substance, third offense, as a habitual offender.  Coon contends the district court abused its discretion by sentencing her to prison solely because she was not in treatment at the time of her sentencing.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Chad Kepros, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Keyun McGowan appeals his convictions after a jury found him guilty on six criminal counts, including first-degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: I. The district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting photographic evidence of McGowan holding a gun matching the description of the murder weapon.  McGowan’s challenge is to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility, and the evidence is not unfairly prejudicial.  II. Looking at the record as a whole, including incriminating statements McGowan made to a friend, we agree that the verdicts are supported by substantial evidence and are not contrary to the weight of the evidence.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Valerie L. Clay, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (34 pages)

            The lessees in a lease-contract dispute and clients in a construction-contract dispute appeal from the district court ruling concluding they materially breached the relevant contracts first and owed the lessor $52,788.74 plus its attorney fees and the contractor $199,681.96 plus accrued interest.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because we find the district court analysis to be accurate.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Greer, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J. (9 pages)

            Curtis Padgett appeals his conviction for first-degree murder following a bench trial.  He claims there is insufficient evidence he was the perpetrator of the beating and stabbing that resulted in the death of Dennis First.  He also contends the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence and the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for stalking in violation of a protective order.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the conviction, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelley, J.  (5 pages)

            Keywani Desharon Evans appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and first-degree robbery.  He alleges (1) the district court violated his due process rights by making a sua sponte objection during cross-examination of a State witness, (2) the weight of the evidence did not support his convictions, and (3) his convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Evans did not preserve his due process claim, and because the weight and sufficiency of the evidence support his convictions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Brian Wright, Magistrate.  WRIT ANNULLED IN PART AND SUSTAINED IN PART.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

            Eagle Rise Developments, LLC, along with its member-managers, Troy and Alexander Wilbur, were found in contempt for failing to comply with a magistrate’s order.  Eagle Rise and the Wilburs sought review by petition for writ of certiorari, which was granted by our supreme court.  On review, Eagle Rise and the Wilburs challenge the court’s jurisdiction, dispute the opposing party’s service of notice, and assert due process and sufficiency-of-the-evidence claims.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude that the court had both personal and subject matter jurisdiction over Troy Wilbur and Eagle Rise and annul the writ as to them.  We sustain the writ as to Alexander Wilbur and vacate the fine and jail sentence imposed.  All remaining claims were not preserved for our review.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            DaJoniss Morman-Jenkins argues his due process rights were violated when the district court denied his request for a transcript of the plea hearing.  He further argues that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion in arrest of judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the due process claim is being brought for the first time on appeal, error was not preserved.  And because Iowa Code § 814.6A (2023) prohibits us from considering Morman-Jenkins’s pro se letter purportedly requesting a motion in arrest of judgment, such claim also fails.  Finally, because the motion in arrest of judgment that was filed by counsel was not compliant with Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.24(3)(b), the court did not abuse its discretion in not considering it.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (2 pages)

            Aaron Stinde appeals the district court’s dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief as time-barred under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: Because none of the arguments Stinde makes on appeal were presented to or decided by the district court, they are not preserved for our review.  We thus affirm the district court’s dismissal of Stinde’s second application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J. (8 pages)

            Sara Brown appeals her conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense.  She challenges the district court’s denial of her motion to suppress, arguing the state trooper who conducted her traffic stop illegally extended the stop.  She challenges her sentence because the district court found she did not have the ability to pay category “B” restitution at the sentencing hearing but imposed it in the written sentencing order.  OPINION HOLDS: The trooper did not illegally extend the traffic stop, and the district court correctly denied the motion to suppress.  We remand for entry of a nunc pro tunc order to reflect the district court’s oral pronouncement that Brown does not have the ability to pay category “B” restitution.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  Dissent by Sandy, J.  (13 pages)

            An estate appeals the district court’s ruling on summary judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find the estate’s certificate of merit did not comply with Iowa Code section 147.140 (2021) and the defendants did not waive their challenge to the certificate of merit.  We affirm.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because I believe the relief the defendants’ seek should be barred by estoppel by acquiescence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey D. Bert and Joel W. Barrows, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (8 pages)

            Carl Porter appeals his conviction for possession with intent to deliver more than five grams of methamphetamine; failure to affix a drug tax stamp; and possession of marijuana, second offense.  He challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress, arguing the stop of his vehicle was unconstitutional; claims the evidence was insufficient to support the finding that he intended to deliver the methamphetamine; and claims the court abused its discretion by denying his motion for new trial, which claimed the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified the stop of Porter’s vehicle.  The finding of intent to deliver was supported by substantial evidence, and the court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Porter’s motion for new trial because the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Chad Kloppe appeals from the spousal support provisions of the district court’s decree dissolving his thirty-year marriage with Rachelle Kloppe.  He alternatively argues that if the spousal support award is affirmed, he should receive one-half of the home equity.  Rachelle requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Here, the district court’s award of $4000 per month in spousal support until Chad reaches age sixty-five is equitable given the parties’ standard of living, Rachelle’s needs before she retires, and Chad’s ability to pay.  And we affirm the property division as proposed by Chad and as set out in the decree.  Lastly, we find that Chad shall pay the sum of $10,000 towards Rachelle's requested appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (3 pages)

            Kegan Morris appeals his conviction for assault on persons in certain occupations causing bodily injury.  He argues there was insufficient evidence to prove he caused bodily injury to the correctional officer.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the correctional officer’s testimony that he felt pain after being punched by Morris sufficient to establish bodily injury.  As such, we affirm his conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey D. Bert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (4 pages)

            Bryan Mitchell appeals the district court’s dismissal of his second application for postconviction relief as time-barred under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2024).  He argues that we should adopt “due process equitable tolling” and remand for the district court to decide whether he could avoid dismissal under that standard.  OPINION HOLDS: Assuming that Mitchell’s argument is preserved for our review, it is foreclosed by the text of section 822.3 and governing supreme court precedent.  We thus affirm the district court’s dismissal of Mitchell’s second application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

            S.M. appeals the denial of her guardianship petition over her fiancé’s son.  She challenges the district court’s finding that she failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence the grounds in Iowa Code section 232D.204(2) (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing her claims de novo, we find she did not establish grounds to create a guardianship, so we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Samantha Gronewald, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            Bryan Loya appeals the order modifying legal custody and physical care of his child. He argues the district court erred by (1) granting Carly sole legal custody, (2) denying his request for joint physical care, (3) denying his request for equal visitation time, (4) granting in part Carly’s motion to reconsider, and (5) awarding Carly trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm and award Carly $5735 in appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court order confirming adjudication of his three children as needing assistance and continuing their removal from his custody.  He contends the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services denied him due process by requiring him to participate in drug testing and by not communicating effectively with him.  He also argues that it was unreasonable to continue the removal based on his refusal to take drug tests.  OPINION HOLDS: Given the State’s proof that the children have been exposed to methamphetamine in the home and the mother’s report that she and the father used methamphetamine together, we affirm the juvenile court’s order. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals the juvenile court’s order adjudicating her child as a child in need of assistance, arguing it is misplaced as the involvement with the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services only related to an abuse incident involving the mother assaulting an older sibling.  OPINION HOLDS: The evidence supported the finding that the child suffered harmful effects from watching the assault on his older sibling and the continuing conflict that flared up between the child and the mother.  We affirm. 

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024), challenging the juvenile court’s determination that termination is in the children’s best interest and the refusal to grant a six-month extension to reunify.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the juvenile court properly terminated the mother’s parental rights.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother challenges the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to her son.  First, she contends the establishment of a guardianship would have been a less-restrictive permanency option.  Second, she argues termination is not in her son’s best interests.  Third, she asks us to apply a permissive exception.  OPINION HOLDS: We decline to find a guardianship to be appropriate.  Because termination is in the best interests of her son and we find no permissive exception applies to preclude termination, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Patrick J. McAvan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child by arguing that termination is not in the child’s best interests and requesting the establishment of a guardianship instead.  OPINION HOLDS: A guardianship would not serve the child’s best interests.  Given the father’s unresolved mental-health and substance-use issues, termination of his rights, which will allow for the child to be adopted into a stable family, is in the child’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, whether termination is in the child’s best interests, and whether termination would be detrimental to the child due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie Talkington, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding termination is in the child’s best interests and no other claim is properly before us, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Joel D. Yates, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (17 pages)

            Devin Gregory appeals his convictions of third-degree sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of a minor, and two counts of supplying alcohol to persons under the legal age.  He raises five claims: the district court should have struck for cause a juror, the district court should have granted a mistrial based on his health issues, the State offered insufficient evidence, the district court only offered brief reasons for denying his motion for new trial, and he challenges his sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court did not abuse its discretion on the first two claims, the State offered sufficient evidence, the motion for new trial was properly denied as untimely, and the district court considered proper factors in sentencing.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, John J. Haney, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahler, P.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Richard Lawson appeals his conviction for serious injury by vehicle, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence that he operated his vehicle in a reckless manner.  OPINION HOLDS: The State presented substantial evidence that Lawson operated his vehicle in a reckless manner.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Howard County, Laura Parrish, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J. (25 pages)

            The defendant appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and abuse of a corpse, raising issues involving a request to strike a juror for cause, use of a supplemental questionnaire for potential jurors, a mid-trial motion to continue, and the evidence supporting his convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding no merit in the defendant’s claims.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Howard County, Alan Heavens, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Ursula Gardner appeals the district court’s judgment against Des Moines Stucco, LLC on her breach-of-contract claim.  She argues that the court should have awarded more damages because the court erred in finding that she failed to mitigate damages, in calculating the amount of damages that could have been mitigated, and in awarding only nominal damages of $1 for the loss of a warranty from Des Moines Stucco.  She also contends the district court should have awarded her common-law attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the court’s finding that Gardner failed to mitigate her damages and its calculation of the damages that could have been mitigated.  So too does it support the court’s finding that Gardner failed to prove the value of her lost warranty.  And nothing in the record comes close to the egregious behavior needed to support Gardner’s extraordinary request for common-law attorney fees.  We thus affirm the district court’s judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, Myron Gookin, Judge.  REVERSED and REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (11 pages)

            Rodney Stajcar appeals the district court’s ruling granting Michael and Sharon West’s petition for declaratory judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court’s order is inconsistent with recent supreme court precedent.  Therefore, we must reverse and remand. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II and Mark J. Smith, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Langholz, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Partial dissent by Buller, J.  (10 pages)

            Dr. David Hartsuch appeals the dismissal of his petition for judicial review naming the Iowa Board of Medicine and the Iowa Board of Pharmacy as respondents.  He argues the district court failed to recognize its jurisdiction over unaddressed elements of his petition, and he challenges the court’s mootness finding under the voluntary-cessation doctrine.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Dr. Hartsuch’s appellate brief fails to adequately identify a reviewable agency action overlooked by the district court, and we reject his voluntary-cessation argument as inapplicable to the district court’s disposition.  We therefore affirm the dismissal of his petition for judicial review.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Because this appeal was not timely taken, I believe we lack jurisdiction and therefore dissent from reaching the merits.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Heather Lauber, Judge.  CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (16 pages)

            Clarence Reed appeals his conviction and sentence for first-degree murder, arguing the district court violated his due process right to competency and unlawfully ordered him to participate in a “victim offender dialogue program.”  OPINION HOLDS: Under the unique facts of this case, we find reinstating the criminal proceedings did not violate Reed’s constitutional rights.  However, we agree the court had no authority to order a victim-offender dialogue.  We therefore affirm Reed’s conviction, vacate his sentence in part, and remand for entry of a corrected sentencing order. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (8 pages)

            John Eddie Hanes III appeals his convictions and sentences after a jury found him guilty of first-degree murder and intimidation with a dangerous weapon.  OPINION HOLDS: Hanes contends that he was denied his right to counsel and the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion for new trial.  We cannot consider these claims on direct appeal, either because Hanes failed to preserve error or we are prohibited by statute.  Hanes also challenges the requirement that he serve a minimum term of incarceration before he is eligible for parole, but he fails to show the sentencing court abused its discretion.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Darnell Demery appeals the dismissal of his fourth application for postconviction relief, arguing that the ineffective assistance of counsel in his prior postconviction proceedings excuses his failure to timely assert his new grounds for relief.  OPINOIN HOLDS: By statute, allegations of ineffective assistance in a prior case under chapter 822 cannot toll or extend the three-year limitation for seeking postconviction relief.  Because Demery asserts no new ground of fact or law exempting his claims from the statutory deadline, we affirm the district court’s order dismissing his untimely application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (14 pages)

            Bridge Gap Engineering appeals the district court’s remand decision, which held that the liquidated-damages provision in its contract with Christian Pfeiffer applied, thereby reducing Bridge Gap’s damage award to $114,750.  On appeal, Bridge Gap challenges the damage award on three grounds: (1) the terms and conditions of the purchase order superseded or negated the liquidated-damages provision; (2) the liquidated-damages clause does not apply in cases of willful misconduct, gross negligence, or fraud, which Bridge Gap alleges occurred; and (3) the district court erred in calculating the damages.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no legal error in the district court’s conclusion that the liquidated-damages provision was part of the parties’ contract. We further hold that the damages previously awarded were limited to the breach of contract claim, and that the contract price fell outside the scope of Bridge Gap’s purchase order with Christian Pfeiffer.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Frederick Houwen appeals the denial of his petition for relief from domestic abuse under Iowa Code chapter 236 (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: Because we determine this action is moot, we do not reach the claims Houwen raises on appeal, and we dismiss his appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Ahlers, Badding, and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Dissent by Sandy, J.  (37 pages)

            The City of Des Moines appeals the denial of its motions for new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict after trial on Matthew Hunter’s claims for disability discrimination and failure-to-accommodate.  OPINION HOLDS: While we find substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict on Hunter’s discrimination claim, we agree that Hunter failed to establish his accommodation claim.  An excuse for prior misconduct is not a reasonable accommodation.  Furthermore, because the district court incorrectly instructed the jury that employers are liable for discriminatory motives they “do not acknowledge or realize,” we must remand for new trial on Hunter’s discrimination claim.  We vacate the district court’s attorney fee award.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because Hunter requested an accommodation and the City proceeded to terminate him rather than explore further options and because Instruction 26 does not misstate Iowa law, I respectfully dissent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (13 pages)

            After the City of Iowa City declined to let him withdraw his resignation, former police officer Emilio Puente sued, alleging a “retaliatory constructive discharge” and seeking declaratory relief.  In this appeal, Puente contends the district court erred in finding that a hearing before the Iowa City Civil Service Commission was the exclusive remedy for his claims of wrongful discharge and duress.  He also challenges the district court’s entry of a directed verdict on his alternative incapacity theory.  OPINION HOLDS: Reviewing for legal error, we agree that Puente’s claims of wrongful discharge and duress are foreclosed by the exclusive remedies available under Iowa Code chapter 400.  We also agree that Puente failed to present a submissible incapacity claim.  We therefore affirm the rulings of the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Audubon County, Margaret Reyes, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

            John Donahue appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) following his conviction for third-degree sexual abuse.  He contends his trial attorneys rendered deficient performance and he is actually innocent.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing the criminal and PCR records, we find Donahue proved neither his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims nor his actual-innocence claim.  We thus affirm the denial of his application.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for assault causing serious injury.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the conviction and the district court did not rely on an impermissible factor during sentencing, we affirm. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I join in the majority opinion as to Davis’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge.  And I also agree with the majority that Davis did not preserve his challenge to an in-court identification.  But I respectfully dissent as to the majority’s opinion that the district court did not rely on an improper sentencing factor and would remand for resentencing in light of controlling supreme court precedent set forth in State v. Lovell, 857 N.W.2d 241, 243 (Iowa 2014).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (9 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals her convictions for child endangerment without bodily injury.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the convictions, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Dr. Moulay Tidriri appeals the district court’s order granting the pre-answer motion to dismiss of the Board of Regents, Iowa State University, and the other defendants in this case (collectively, “ISU”).  He argues the district court erred in dismissing his claims based on failure to state a claim, failure to exhaust administrative remedies, sovereign immunity, and res judicata.  OPINION HOLDS: Concurring with the district court’s well-reasoned opinion, we affirm the grant of ISU’s pre-answer motion to dismiss. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Eric J. Nelson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (9 pages)

            Taylor Rutledge appeals his conviction of first-degree sexual abuse.  He contends that the out-of-court statements of the child victim, O.A., recounted by the nurse practitioner who examined him at a child advocacy center, violated his federal right to confront the accuser.  He also contends the child’s statements, made to both the nurse practitioner and the child’s mother, violated his right under the Iowa Constitution to confront his accuser in face-to-face testimony, as our supreme court recently found in State v. White, 9 N.W.3d 1 (Iowa 2024).  OPINION HOLDS: We need not address either substantive claim because any error was harmless.  Rutledge confessed that he sexually abused O.A. while babysitting, and there is ample physical evidence of the severe injuries he inflicted, which required the child to undergo general anesthesia and surgery.  Thus, we affirm the conviction. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (16 pages)

            Michael Zanoni appeals his convictions for possession with intent to deliver over five grams of methamphetamine (enhanced as a second offense); failure to affix drug tax stamp (enhanced as a habitual offender); and possession of marijuana (enhanced as a third offense and habitual offender).  He argues: (1) his right to be brought to trial within one year of arraignment was violated; (2) the district court erred by not enforcing a purported plea agreement; (3) the district court erred by denying his request to continue his trial; (4) the district court erred in denying his motion seeking to suppress evidence because the “original” search warrant application and warrant was not retained; (5) the district court erred by denying his motion for new trial based on prosecutorial misconduct for failing to call a witness; and (6) the district court erred by denying his motion for new trial based on the claim that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: (1) Zanoni’s right to speedy trial was not violated because he waived his speedy trial rights on the record and in writing but only attempts to challenge his written waiver.  (2) Even if Zanoni and the State reached a plea agreement, Zanoni never entered a guilty plea that was accepted by the court and he made no showing that he detrimentally relied on the agreements, so the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to enforce the purported plea agreement.  (3) The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Zanoni’s motion to continue trial because the trial date had already been continued thirteen times and Zanoni had redemanded his right to speedy trial.  (4) The district court did not err when it denied Zanoni’s motion to suppress evidence from his cell phone because Iowa Rule of Electronic Procedure 16.411(1) does not require a paper version of the warrant applications or warrant to be retained.  (5) The prosecutor did not commit prosecutorial misconduct by not calling a witness listed in the minutes of testimony.  (6) The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Zanoni’s motion for new trial because the weight of the evidence supported Zanoni's convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (19 pages)

            Stephen Dierickx appeals the district court’s summary-judgment ruling dismissing his breach-of-contract, negligent-misrepresentation, fraudulent-misrepresentation, consumer-fraud, slander-of-title, and quiet-title claims arising from an online real estate auction conducted by DreamDirt Farm & Ranch Real Estate, LLC.  OPINION HOLDS: Many of Dierickx’s claims rest on his theory that he entered a contract to purchase the real estate when he received an email from DreamDirt informing him that he was the highest bidder in the online auction.  But applying longstanding principles of contract law to this twenty-first century online auction, we agree with the district court that the undisputed facts showed that no valid contract was formed because Dierickx’s bid was an offer that was never accepted by the landowner.  And Dierickx’s alternative claims based on fraud fail because Dierickx points to no false statements on which he relied to his detriment.  We thus affirm the district court’s summary-judgment ruling dismissing Dierickx’s claims.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Michael K. Jacobsen and Brad McCall, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (21 pages)

            A husband and wife appeal summary judgment rulings, raise claims concerning evidentiary rulings, and allege the district court erred in declining to submit the issue of punitive damages to the jury.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the challenged summary judgment orders were appropriate and determine the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings.  The district court committed no legal error in its directed verdict on punitive damages.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mitchell County, Elizabeth Batey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (5 pages)

            Ryan Meyer challenges his conviction for possession of marijuana based on the sufficiency of the evidence.  He contends he presented sufficient evidence to warrant a jury instruction on the hemp exception, and the State failed to meet its burden of proving the substances were marijuana rather than hemp.  OPINION HOLDS: The State produced sufficient evidence to support Meyer’s conviction for possession of marijuana.  The State was not required to disprove the hemp exception because Meyer produced no evidence that the substance was hemp.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Celene Gogerty, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            A defendant appeals his sentences for intimidation with a dangerous weapon and domestic abuse assault.  He argues the State breached the plea agreement by failing to advocate for suspended sentences with probation.  OPINION HOLDS: The prosecutor fulfilled the State’s obligations under the plea agreement and did not express material reservations or suggest an alternative sentence.  Accordingly, the court affirms the sentences imposed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Adair County, Elisabeth Reynoldson (motions) and Stacy Ritchie (trial), Judges.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (10 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for possession of drugs and ammunition as a prohibited person.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm as to the search warrant and sufficiency of the evidence claims.  Because the defendant was not advised of the need to file a motion in arrest of judgment and the colloquy was materially deficient, we vacate the recidivist portion of the conviction for possession of a controlled substance and the resulting sentence, and we remand with directions. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Jessica R. Noll, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (19 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal, challenging the grounds for termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on both appeals.  And we sanction counsel for one of the parties based on her use of artificial intelligence leading to “hallucinated” cases in her reply brief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John M. Wright, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            John Stanley Kephart Jr. appeals the sentences imposed after pleading guilty to theft in the first degree and burglary in the third degree.  He alleges the district court abused its discretion in declining to suspend his sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the district court exercised proper discretion in sentencing Kephart, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

            Jennifer and Daniel King divorced.  Jennifer appeals the district court’s award of spousal support, arguing it was inequitable and the court improperly considered the property division.  Jennifer asks us to remand with directions to exchange tax returns.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court properly considered property division when awarding spousal support, but we modify the duration of the award.  Jennifer did not preserve her claim regarding the tax returns.  Finally, we remand for the district court to calculate a reasonable appellate attorney fee award to Jennifer. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, John J. Haney, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (16 pages)

            A defendant appeals several convictions, challenging two evidentiary rulings and the imposition of consecutive sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the determination concerning the insanity defense and malice aforethought finding.  And we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s sentencing decision.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            William Moothart appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated.  He argues that admitting his blood-test results deprived him of due process when the State destroyed his blood sample before trial, the State’s late production of a chain-of-custody document warrants a new trial, and insufficient evidence supports the verdict.  OPINION HOLDS: Due process does not referee strict compliance with state law—it safeguards Moothart’s access to constitutionally material evidence.  Because Moothart has not shown his blood sample had exculpatory value at the time it was destroyed or that the State intentionally destroyed the sample in bad faith, admitting testimony about his blood-test results did not deprive him of due process.  As for his other issues, the State’s late production of a chain-of-custody document was not prejudicial, so we deny his request for a new trial.  And substantial evidence supports the jury’s findings that Moothart indeed operated the motorcycle and did so while under the influence of alcohol.  We thus affirm Moothart’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (20 pages)

            Travis McCoy appeals the district court’s custody decree granting Jessica Smith physical care of their minor daughter.  He contends the district court erred by sua sponte setting aside a previous order that found Smith to be in default and that the district court erred by placing physical care of the child with Smith.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the child’s best interests are best served by placing the child in McCoy’s physical care.  We thus remand this matter to the district court for entry of custody, visitation, and child support orders consistent with this opinion.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because I would give the district court’s credibility findings the deference they are due, recognize the abusive dynamic at the heart of this case, and affirm placement of the child in mother’s physical care, I dissent.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Jeffrey C. McDaniel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (6 pages)

            A grandfather appeals the denial of his petition for grandparent visitation rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the grandfather could not overcome the presumption under Iowa Code chapter 600C (2023) that the mother was unfit to make decisions regarding visitation, we affirm the district court’s denial of his petition for grandparent visitation rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, Charles Borth, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J. (14 pages)

            Keaton Leach appeals his jury convictions of first-degree harassment and three counts of stalking.  On appeal, Leach argues there is insufficient evidence to identify him and that there is insufficient evidence of the stalking charges.  He also claims the district court erred in admitting improper hearsay.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey Farrell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (13 pages)

            Jerry Hayes appeals the district court’s ruling affirming the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commissioner’s order, which in turn affirmed the deputy commissioner’s arbitration decision in its entirety.  On appeal, Hayes argues the commissioner’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence, committed an error of law, and was irrational, illogical, and wholly unjustifiable.  He additionally argues he is entitled to an award of alternate medical care, necessary medical expenses, and independent medical evaluation (IME) reimbursement.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding substantial evidence supported the commissioner’s decision and agreeing with the commissioner that the lack of a permanent disability makes Hayes’s remaining issues moot. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Jovonte Washington appeals his sentence for second-degree theft, arguing that the district court should have suspended his five-year prison sentence and placed him on probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Seeing no abuse of the district court’s considerable sentencing discretion, we affirm Washington’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Ashley Beisch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s denial of her petition to terminate the father’s parental rights under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2024).  She alleges termination is appropriate because the father abandoned the child and it is in the best interests of the child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we agree with the juvenile court that the mother failed to establish the father abandoned the child, we affirm the order denying her termination petition without reaching the question of the child’s best interests.

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

            Alejandro Garcia appeals the district court’s order granting Katherine Garcia primary physical care over their two minor children.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude that joint physical care is not in the children’s best interests, and we affirm the district court’s order awarding Katherine physical care of the two youngest daughters as well as the district court’s visitation schedule.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Shawna L. Ditsworth, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A respondent appeals a mental-health civil commitment order and asserts ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the civil commitment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court that termination of the father’s parental rights is in the son’s best interest.  And the court appropriately denied the father’s request for six more months to work toward reunification because there was no prospect that the need for removal would no longer exist after six months.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the ground for termination was established, termination is in the child’s best interests, and the father failed to prove an exception, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, claiming termination was not in the son’s best interest due to the parent-child bond.  She also requests an extension of time for reunification with the child to give her a chance to drug-test more often and enter substance-use treatment.  OPINION HOLDS: While the mother has a close bond with the son, her failure to make any progress in addressing her substance-use problem continues to be a concern.  Given her long history of substance use, the juvenile court was reasonable in determining it did not have cause to grant an extension, and termination is in the son’s best interest.  We thus affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Tabitha Turner, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Daquashaila Jackson petitions for a writ of certiorari challenging the district court’s notice of firearm prohibition.  She alleges the district court’s notice of firearm prohibition is unconstitutional. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the firearms prohibition is not part of the sentence, we annul the writ of certiorari.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Mark T. Hostager, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Charles Beyer appeals his conviction for possession of methamphetamine, second offense, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress.  He argues that the warrantless search of his wallet was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, section 8, of the Iowa Constitution.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court that the search was reasonable under both our federal and state constitutions because the wallet was in Beyer’s pocket at or immediately before the time of his arrest and so the search-incident-to-lawful-arrest exception to the warrant requirements applies.  We thus affirm the district court’s denial of the motion to suppress and Beyer’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (3 pages)

            Cody Plummer appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing trial counsel was ineffective in failing to move to suppress his statements to police.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (12 pages)

            Tyler Mills appeals his conviction for third-offense stalking, challenging the denial of his motion for mistrial, the sufficiency of the evidence, and a sentencing enhancement that the district court imposed based on Mills’s stipulation to prior stalking convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of Mills’s mistrial motion, and substantial evidence supports the disputed elements of his conviction.  However, we agree with Mills that the district court’s colloquy failed to confirm that his stipulation to prior convictions was voluntary and intelligent.  Therefore, we vacate Mills’s sentence and remand this case for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Jennifer Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (3 pages)

            James McCurdy appeals the district court’s dismissal of his application for postconviction relief, arguing the three-year limitations period in Iowa Code section 822.3 (2023) is unconstitutional.  OPINION HOLDS: McCurdy fails to explain why we should second-guess the constitutionality of section 822.3 based on the Supreme Court’s reasoning in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022).  We therefore deem any constitutional challenge waived.  Because McCurdy filed his application long after the three-year limitations period had closed, we affirm dismissal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Celene Gogerty, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J. (5 pages)

            Darion Hermes appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to voluntary manslaughter and robbery in the first degree.  He claims the court abused its discretion when determining the mandatory minimum sentence for the robbery conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because the sentencing court considered many relevant factors before reaching its decision and therefore did not abuse its discretion when determining the mandatory minimum.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Chad Kepros, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (14 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals her conviction for first-degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of venue change or a mistrial, substantial evidence supporting the verdict, and the jury instruction claim to be unpreserved, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lyon County, Jessica Noll, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (5 pages)

            Jackson Nockels was convicted for first-offense operating while intoxicated.  He appeals the denial of his motion to suppress, arguing that because the deputy lacked reasonable suspicion to initiate the traffic stop, his federal and state constitutional rights were violated.  OPINION HOLDS: Considering the totality of the circumstances, we agree with the district court that the deputy had reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop.  Accordingly, we affirm the denial of the motion to suppress.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (12 pages)

            Roland Ricardo Anderson appeals the district court order denying his application for postconviction relief, arguing he received ineffective assistance from trial counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, as Anderson failed to meet his burden to prove ineffective assistance of counsel.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Ashley Beisch, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (10 pages)

            Kirby appeals his conviction of two counts of assault on persons in certain occupations, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Following our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (4 pages)

            Kenneth Nelson appeals the sentences imposed following his guilty pleas to two charges of third-offense possession of controlled substances.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of the district court’s discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, David Faith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (3 pages)

            Defendant appeals two convictions, claiming an Iowa statute relating to search and seizure of garbage is unconstitutional.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of Lowman’s motion to suppress the challenged evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            M.T. appeals the protective order entered under Iowa Code chapter 236A (2024) barring him from contact with his five-year-old daughter, N.W.  He contends the child’s mother A.W. failed to meet her burden to prove he sexually abused N.W.  OPINION HOLDS: We find A.W. proved the sexual abuse allegations by a preponderance of the evidence, so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brendan Greiner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (6 pages)

            Jeremy Batiste appeals his sentence for domestic-abuse assault causing bodily injury, arguing that the district court improperly considered unproven criminal conduct when it considered his guilty plea and failure to appear for sentencing in a separate criminal case shortly before his commission of this offense.  OPINION HOLDS: The court indeed relied on the conduct Batiste challenges on appeal.  But the court could properly do so because Batiste’s counsel admitted at sentencing that the conduct occurred.  We thus affirm Batiste’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the district court’s modified dissolution decree placing physical care of his children with their mother.  OPINION HOLDS: Considering the history of these parents, the record before us, and the district court’s findings, we affirm the district court’s order and we decline to award either party appellate attorneys’ fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Joy Langrine appeals his sentence following his guilty plea to assault with intent to commit sexual abuse.  On appeal, Langrine claims that the district court abused its discretion in imposing a two-year sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (2 pages)

            A former spouse appeals the dismissal of his petition to vacate his dissolution decree.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s ruling.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (6 pages)

            Victor Swai appeals his sentence for assault causing bodily injury alleging the district court considered improper sentencing factors and did not explain its reasons for the sentence imposed.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find the district court did not consider improper sentencing factors and gave adequate explanation for its sentence.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A former spouse appeals from a decree of dissolution of marriage, challenging the division and award of three accounts.  OPINION HOLDS: Following our de novo review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, David W. Brooks, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother challenges the statutory grounds for termination of her parental rights to a child and argues termination is not in the child’s best interests.  A father separately appeals termination of his parental rights, asserting reasonable efforts were not made to reunite him with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, challenging the grounds for termination and seeking either a guardianship or a six-month extension.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother, Krista, challenges the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to her six-year-old son, M.M.  First, she contends that the State did not offer clear and convincing evidence to support a ground for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1) (2025).  Second, she argues that the court should have preserved the parent-child relationship under section 232.116(3)(c) because M.M. is “intensely bonded” to her.  Finally, as a fallback, Krista asks for six more months to reunify with her son.  OPINION HOLDS: After reviewing her claims de novo, we find no basis for granting relief.

            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 Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (7 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the parental rights of the mother and fathers of seven children.  The mother of all children and the oldest child’s father separately appeal.  Both challenge the statutory grounds for termination and whether termination is in their respective children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination of the father’s rights because the child could not be returned to his custody due to his incarceration, and termination of his parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  The State established a statutory ground for termination of the mother’s parental rights because the children could not be safely returned to her custody, and termination of her parental rights is in the children’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mark C. Cord III, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (12 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights to C.C.  The mother challenges the termination, arguing (1) the State did not prove statutory grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h)(4) (2025), (2) termination is not in the best interest of the child, and (3) the juvenile court should have granted a six-month extension to work toward reunification.  The father solely challenges the finding as to his rights under the same statutory ground for termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm both parents’ appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Michael Motto, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals a permanency review order transferring guardianship of her two children to their paternal grandmother.  She claims the juvenile court erred in finding that the children could not be returned to her home and that placement with the grandmother was in their best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The children were removed from the mother’s custody because of a serious non-accidental injury to one of the children, returned, and removed again because the child was injured again.  The mother has not provided a safe home for the children, and it is against their best interests to delay permanency in hopes she might one day do so.  Following our de novo review, we affirm the court’s permanency decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights alleging termination is not in the best interests of the children and that a permissive exception applies to her case.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find termination of parental rights is in the best interests of the children and the mother did not preserve error on her permissive exception claim, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dickinson County, John M. Sandy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            Robert Moriston appeals his convictions for two counts of forgery and one count of identity theft.  He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions, arguing that the State failed to establish identity.  He also challenges the admission of certain evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Moriston’s convictions are supported by substantial evidence establishing he is the individual who perpetrated the offenses.  The district court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted the challenged evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, John Bauercamper, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument en banc.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Partial Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (20 pages)

            Dillon Heiller appeals from his convictions for first-degree theft and second-degree theft for the taking of two separate vehicles.  He contends the evidence is insufficient to establish territorial jurisdiction on one charge and is insufficient as to the taking and intent elements on both charges.  OPINION HOLDS: Heiller’s territorial-jurisdiction argument is not a sufficiency challenge.  Instead, it is an attack on the marshaling instruction for failure to include a territorial-jurisdiction element.  But Heiller did not object to the instruction, so he failed to preserve error on that claim.  To the extent that he intends to raise a constitutional challenge, he failed to preserve error by raising that claim in the district court.  To the extent that Heiller argues that territorial jurisdiction is an issue of subject matter jurisdiction, we disagree.  As to his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence on the taking and intent elements of both charges, we find substantial evidence supporting the jury’s guilty verdicts.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: The majority’s approach disregards a clear statement of law that is binding on our court and anchors its analysis to Heiller’s jury instruction claim without addressing the sufficiency-of-the-evidence claim.  Territorial jurisdiction is an essential element of the offense, and the State failed to offer substantial evidence to show any element took place in Iowa.  Under our precedents, I would reverse Heiller’s second-degree theft conviction and remand for dismissal.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, John Bauercamper, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Opinion considered without oral argument en banc.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (12 pages)

Dillon Heiller appeals his conviction for second-degree theft by raising a territorial-jurisdiction argument and challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject Heiller’s territorial-jurisdiction argument for the same reasons expressed in State v. Heiller, No. 24-0169.  Heiller’s conviction is supported by substantial evidence.  DISSENT ASSERTS: For the same reasons I explained in State v. Heiller, No. 24-0169, I would reverse Heiller’s conviction for second-degree theft because the State of Iowa lacked territorial jurisdiction to prosecute him for taking a vehicle from its owner in Wisconsin. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Grundy County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (9 pages)

            Kevin Halladey appeals his conviction for first-degree murder, arguing that the state failed to prove that he acted with malice aforethought or with premeditation and specific intent to kill the victim.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict.  The nature of the killing by multiple blows to the head, Halladey’s past conduct toward the victim and her children, and his anger at being stabbed by her teenage son earlier that night all support the jury’s finding that Halladey acted with the malice aforethought, premeditation, and specific intent to kill required for first-degree murder.  We thus affirm Halladey’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Brian Manning appeals his conviction for second-degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject Manning’s claims that his conviction is unsupported by the weight or sufficiency of the evidence.  Because Manning failed to preserve error on his remaining claims, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (22 pages)

            Matthew Maxwell appeals the district court’s denial of his petition to modify the physical care provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Katie Maxwell.  On appeal, Matthew contends the district court erred by not granting his request to modify the decree to provide for joint physical care of his and Katie’s two sons.  Additionally, the Iowa Department of Human Services, Child Support Services (“CSS”) appeals the district court’s modification of the child support provisions of the dissolution decree, arguing it was a party to the decree and should have received notice and an opportunity to be heard on the issue of modification of child support.  OPINION HOLDS: After our careful review of the record, we affirm the district court’s denial of Matthew’s request for joint physical care.  We conclude joint physical care is not in the children’s best interests.  However, we vacate the district court’s modification of the child support provisions.  Because CSS was providing support services prior to the start of the modification action, it was a party to the decree and should have been given notice and an opportunity to be heard.  Accordingly, we remand for a hearing on the issue of modification of the child support provisions of the decree. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Alivonta Deneil Turner appeals the district court’s custody order granting Ariana Elizabeth Garrels physical care and sole legal custody to their child.  In addition to arguments regarding the custody and physical care issues, Turner argues that Iowa Code section 610.1 (2022), which provides the fee for ordering the transcript of the district court proceedings cannot be deferred, is unconstitutional and that requiring him to pay the transcript fee violates his constitutional rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because all of Turner’s arguments are waived or meritless to the extent they are properly raised, we affirm the district court’s decree.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            John Coleman appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court imposed an illegal sentence by placing him on probation for three years following his guilty plea to a felony and a misdemeanor.  Coleman argues that, because his sentence includes a misdemeanor offense, his probation must be limited to a maximum of two years.  OPINION HOLDS: The sentence imposed is not illegal.  Coleman’s sentences were run consecutively, which Iowa Code section 901.8 (2024) requires to be treated as a single sentence.  Because that sentence included a felony, the district was required to place Coleman on probation for a period of two to five years.  The ordered three-year term of probation is within that range and not illegal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (4 pages)

            The plaintiffs in a medical malpractice action appeal the order dismissing their claims with prejudice for failing to substantially comply with the requirements for a certificate of merit under Iowa Code section 147.140 (2020).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court’s ruling complies with recent Iowa Supreme Court precedent, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral arguments by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Jason Barksley appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) concerning his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree.  He alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel and that the district court abused its discretion by accepting a written guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s denial of the application for postconviction relief because Barksley fails to establish his counsel was ineffective and the district court’s acceptance of the written guilty plea was proper.

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

            The City of Burlington appeals the district court’s denial of its petition to take title of the property of John and Michelle Schoof.  The City contends (1) the district court erred in refusing to consider the City’s proposed exhibits that were not offered or admitted into evidence; (2) the district court erred in finding that the Schoofs could not be trespassers on their own property; and (3) the district court’s ruling undermines the “valuable tool” in Iowa Code section 657A.10B(4) (2023) meant to discourage owners from abandoning  properties in a deteriorated and dangerous condition.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in declining to consider proposed exhibits the City did not offer into evidence, and the Schoofs did not waive any objection to their admission.  And to prove trespass and abandonment, the City cites an inspection report it never offered into evidence and that is not available to us on appeal.  The City did not carry its burden, so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Michael O. Carpenter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (6 pages)

            Brandon Lautenbach challenges the sufficiency of evidence supporting his conviction for second-degree sexual abuse.  OPINION HOLDS: When viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence was sufficient for a rational factfinder to conclude that Lautenbach used force creating a substantial risk of death or serious injury.  Accordingly, we affirm his conviction for second-degree sexual abuse.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            David Nuno appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) concerning his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree. He alleges his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the denial of the application for PCR because Nuno cannot establish either his trial or appellate counsel failed to perform an essential duty.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (18 pages)

            Siblings and trust beneficiaries, Carl Meyers and Teresa Woodley, appeal the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment (1) concluding that a specific provision of the trust adeemed; (2) concluding that when Carl and Teresa served as co-trustees of the trust, they breached their fiduciary duties; (3) removing Carl and Teresa as co-trustees; and (4) ordering Carl and Teresa to each pay half of the attorney fees incurred by their sibling, Lora Hickey.  Lora requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s order in all respects as to ademption of the specific bequest to Carl as described in this opinion, except we modify it to provide that the security interests in the relevant company held by the trust are released to Carl and extinguished.  We affirm the decision finding that Carl and Teresa breached their fiduciary duties and the decision to remove them as trustees of the trust.  We also affirm the district court’s award of attorney fees, finding much of the challenge to the award unpreserved and no abuse of discretion as to the issues that were preserved.  Finally, we decline to order Carl or Teresa to pay Lora’s appellate attorney fees for this appeal. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Andrea J. Dryer, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            Jeremy Thomas Miller-Verduyn appeals the property settlement amount he was ordered to pay to his former wife, Angela Beth Miller-Verduyn, and the means by which the district court ordered him to do so in its dissolution decree.  Specifically, he argues that the district court should have determined the marital portion of the John Deere Tax-Deferred Savings Plan (TDSP), deducted it from the lump sum amount, and transferred said portion to Angela via a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO).  He also contends the amount and manner in which the district court structured the lump sum property settlement did not take into consideration his financial circumstances.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we believe use of a QDRO in dividing the John Deere TDSP is equitably required, we modify the property equalization provisions of the dissolution decree and remand for issuance of a QDRO consistent with this opinion.

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

            Dustin McGonigle appeals the district court’s grant of Finley Hospital and Alejandro Pulido, M.D.’s (together, “the Hospital”) second motion to dismiss, arguing (1) his certificate of merit substantially complies with Iowa Code section 147.140 (2024); and (2) the Hospital’s challenge to the certificate is waived and precluded due to the Hospital’s failure to raise the issue in its first motion to dismiss.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Banwart v. Neurosurgery of North Iowa, P.C., 18 N.W.3d 267, 272–75 (Iowa 2025) definitively establishes that a certificate of merit affidavit must be “signed by the expert under oath or under penalty of perjury” to be substantially compliant with the statute and because the hospital’s failure to raise the certificate-of-merit defect in its first motion to dismiss does not preclude or waive the issue in its second motion to dismiss, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (12 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions of willful injury causing bodily injury, first-degree harassment, and domestic abuse assault by strangulation.  The defendant asserts (1) the court erred by denying his motion for a continuance to obtain further information regarding a fair-cross-section challenge; (2) he was prejudiced by the court’s evidentiary rulings; (3) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions; and (4) the court abused its sentencing discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, 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 Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            R.D. Nicolaisen appeals his convictions and sentences for willful injury and domestic abuse assault. He alleges there was insufficient evidence to convict him of willful injury and the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find there was substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict and the district court did not abuse its sentencing discretion. We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tom Reidel and Jeffrey C. McDaniel, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (5 pages)

            James Edwin Brown appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss, arguing the State violated his right to speedy trial, that there was no good cause to delay his trial date past the one-year speedy trial deadline.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court properly found good cause to delay Brown’s trial.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Brown’s motion to dismiss.  We affirm.

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

            Joe Wedeking appeals a ruling in favor of MSS Capital, LLC on its claim for specific performance and declaratory relief following a contract dispute.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the evidence supports the district court’s determination that the parties manifested mutual intent to the terms of a contract, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (11 pages)

            A jury convicted Laquel Carrol of tampering with a witness, in violation of Iowa Code section 720.4 (2023).  Carrol appeals his conviction on two grounds, arguing (1) there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction and (2) the court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial based on an improper jury instruction and the jury’s access to unauthorized information, namely the inclusion of the trial information on the instruction’s cover page.  OPINION HOLDS: Carrol failed to preserve his objection to the instruction cover page that included charging alternatives from the trial information, so we do not consider that challenge.  And because the verdict was supported by substantial evidence, we affirm Carrol’s conviction of tampering with a witness.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            Qiuinyana Jones appeals her sentences for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, eluding law enforcement, accessory after the fact, and conspiracy to commit a forcible felony, arguing the district court abused its discretion in considering that a death not resulting from Jones’s conduct occurred and in denying her request for a suspended sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in considering part of the circumstances giving rise to offenses for which Jones was charged nor in declining her request for a suspended sentence.  We thus affirm the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Kazius Childress appeals his sentence for second-degree murder arguing that the district court deprived him of the right of allocution under Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.23(2)(d)(3).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court asked Childress whether he wanted to make a statement of allocution and his attorney declined on his behalf, the court did not deprive Childress of his right of allocution under rule 2.23(2)(d)(3).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wayne County, Elisabeth Reynoldson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J. (5 pages)

            Robert Harold Fleming IV appeals from his sentence for theft in the first degree following his guilty plea, arguing the district court abused its discretion by imposing a period of incarceration and erred in failing to immediately dismiss two other counts as requested by the State.  OPINION HOLDS: Because those two other counts have been dismissed and the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering a term of incarceration, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Joseph Mayorga Jr. appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief, claiming the district court erred in finding his application was time-barred under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2021).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Mayorga’s application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, David Faith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Elizabeth Sowers and Ross Turner divorced in 2021.  The parties agreed to joint legal custody and joint physical care of their three children.  But their communication related to the children deteriorated, so each filed for a modification of the decree.  The district court ordered a different parenting schedule and other strategies to facilitate communication but did not change the custodial or physical-care status.  Elizabeth appeals, arguing that she proved a substantial change in circumstances that supported granting her sole legal custody, physical care, and a different parenting schedule to minimize the conflicts.  Both parents request appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the award of sole legal custody or physical care is not in the children’s best interests and attorney fees are not warranted.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (5 pages)

            Karie McElroy appeals her sentence for serious injury by motor vehicle and operating while intoxicated, arguing the district court abused its discretion by sentencing her to a term of incarceration rather than granting her request for probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm McElroy’s sentence.

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

            Kennith Onstot contends that he paid health insurance premiums for coverage of the parties’ child during a time when he was court-ordered to pay cash medical support payments under Iowa Code chapter 252E.1(3) (2022).  Kennith asked the district court to waive the outstanding cash medical balance.  The district court denied his request, concluding it did not have statutory authority to retroactively waive the cash medical support payments that accrued even though Kennith paid for private health insurance and otherwise would not have been required to maintain cash medical support; Kennith challenges this decision on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: While sympathetic to Kennith’s concerns, we agree with the district court that our case law and the statutes that govern the cash medical support obligation do not allow us to retroactively change his court-ordered obligations.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason A. Burns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Michael Beaver appeals his sentences for two counts of indecent exposure.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in selecting concurrent two-year indeterminate prison sentences rather than rather than sentencing him to time served.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, Daniel P. Vakulskas, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

            Jason Petersen appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the evidence underlying his conviction for operating while intoxicated, third offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the officers had reasonable suspicion to seize Petersen based on his wife’s tip and the surrounding circumstances, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Lars G. Anderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Elizabeth Kastein-Ferneau appeals an order modifying the physical-care provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Kolin Ferneau.  She claims the district court erred by finding a material and substantial change in circumstances had occurred since the decree warranting modification, by giving “improper weight and deference” to a child and family reporter’s report, and by failing to consider “alternative remedies.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the physical-care provision in a custody modification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (10 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three children.  The father of the youngest child appeals termination of his rights to that child.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Michelle Jungers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (29 pages)

            Seven-year-old A.S. became an orphan after first her father and then her mother died of drug overdoses in a ten-day span.  After adjudicating A.S. a child in need of assistance (CINA) and following a dispositional hearing, the juvenile court ordered the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to place the child with caregivers from the category of fictive kin.  The intervenor-grandparents challenge that ruling and others, arguing (1) A.S. should never have been adjudicated CINA because they were appropriate family members ready to take over her care when her parents died; (2) in the alternative—assuming we do not reverse the CINA adjudication—we should reverse the part of the dispositional order placing A.S. with fictive kin rather than relatives, and (3) the juvenile court should have granted their motion for concurrent jurisdiction so they can pursue a guardianship under Iowa Code chapter 232D (2024).  While filing neither an appeal nor a petition for writ of certiorari, the State—representing HHS—takes a position contrary to the juvenile court’s ruling.  The child’s attorney responds in support of the juvenile court ruling and asks us to disregard the State’s appellate filings.  OPINION HOLDS: We do not consider the State’s position or filings since it argues against the juvenile court ruling but did not file a notice of appeal.  We cannot reach the merits of the grandparents’ arguments about the CINA adjudication.  And we affirm the juvenile court’s dispositional ruling concluding placement with adult relatives is not in A.S.’s best interests and agree that denying concurrent jurisdiction serves A.S’s best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son contending that termination was not in his best interests and that the court should have entered a bridge order.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court that it was in the child’s best interests to terminate the mother’s rights and a bridge order is not an appropriate option, nor is it in the child’s best interests.  So we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (3 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to G.W. (born in 2019) and D.W. (born in 2023) pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (h) (2024), respectively.  The mother appeals, arguing (1) the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify her with the children; (2) the State did not prove the statutory grounds for termination because the children could have been returned to her custody at the time of the termination trial; (3) alternatively, she should be given more time to work toward reunification; (4) termination of her parental rights is not in the children’s best interests; and (5) the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to save the parent-child relationships.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to both children. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Erica Crisp, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the mother’s appeal, we find that sufficient evidence supports the statutory grounds for termination, terminating her rights is in the child’s best interests, the parent-child bond exception does not apply, and the record does not support her request for more time.  As for the father, we find his reasonable-efforts argument was waived, termination of his parental rights is in the child’s best interests, and an extension of time is unwarranted.  We affirm both parents’ appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph Tofilon, Judge.  AFFIRMED on both appeals.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  They both challenge the statutory ground for termination and request more time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm.  The child could not be returned to either parent’s custody at the time of the termination hearing, and an extension of time is unwarranted. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, David Brooks, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of parental rights to her daughter.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court.  The State provided clear and convincing evidence that the daughter could not be returned to the mother at the time of the termination hearing given the mother’s positive drug tests and her failure to progress beyond supervised visits.  We also agree that termination is in the daughter’s best interest because of the mother’s failure to fully address the safety concerns she poses to the daughter and the daughter’s success in her current placement.  And the mother failed to preserve error on her argument that the court should have applied the parent-bond exception.  We thus affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

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

            A mother appeals a bridge order entered in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding.  The mother alleges the district court erred in granting the father sole legal and physical custody and placing restrictions on her visitation.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the issuance of a bridge order granting the father sole legal and physical custody, as well as the visitation restrictions imposed by the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his daughter.  He claims the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court, termination is not in the child’s best interests, and he should have been granted additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Matthew A. Schuling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to her three children under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (l) (2025) and to the youngest under paragraph (h) as well..  The mother appeals, arguing the State failed to prove the grounds for termination, termination is not in the children’s best interests, the juvenile court should have applied permissive exceptions to termination, and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to fulfill its obligation to make reasonable efforts towards reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

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

            A mother appeals the district court’s order terminating her parental rights to her child under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e), (h), and (l) (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court properly terminated the mother’s parental rights.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, Kristal L. Phillips, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to both J.Q. (born in 2023) and W.Q. (born in 2024) pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) and (l) (2025).  The mother appeals, arguing (1) the State did not prove the statutory grounds for termination and (2) because termination is not in the children’s best interests, the juvenile court should have established a guardianship in the paternal grandparents instead of terminating the mother’s parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother waived her challenge to the statutory ground.  Even absent waiver, clear and convincing evidence supports termination under section 232.116(1)(h).  And termination is in the best interests of the children.  So, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to J.Q. and W.Q.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (11 pages)

            A jury found Coby Hemphill guilty of sexual abuse in the third degree and sexual exploitation of a minor; both crimes involved fifteen-year-old A.R.  Weeks later, the court learned that unadmitted evidence had been inadvertently sent back to the jury for its deliberation—eleven pages of screenshots purportedly showing messages sent by Hemphill that were never offered by the State but remained on a flash drive that held some of the State’s admitted exhibits.  Hemphill moved for new trial on the basis that the jury received any evidence, paper or document out of court not authorized by the court, which he asserted violated his constitutional right to a fair trial, among others.  The district court denied the motion for new trial, which Hemphill challenges on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: After applying the jury misconduct test test, we affirm the denial of Hemphill’s motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (11 pages)

            The State appeals the district court’s order restoring a petitioner’s firearm rights under Iowa Code section 724.31.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we find that K.H. established by a preponderance of the evidence that he will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to the public safety and that restoration of his firearm rights would not be contrary to the public interest.  We therefore affirm the district court’s order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Robert Raveling appeals the decree dissolving his twenty-year marriage with Suzann Raveling.  He challenges the property division and the award of traditional spousal support.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree that it is equitable to equally divide the proceeds from the sale of the marital home.  While the home was indeed purchased in part with Robert’s inherited funds, the parties intended for the home to serve as their joint retirement nest egg, they resided in the home for nearly thirteen years, and Suzann contributed to the home’s substantial increase in value—keeping it well maintained and overseeing improvements.  We also agree that the traditional-spousal-support award is equitable given the parties’ twenty-year marriage, Suzann’s diminished income due to a disability she suffered during the marriage, and Robert’s greater financial position leaving the marriage.  And we award Suzann appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Daniel Kudron challenges the order granting summary disposition of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the postconviction court did not clearly abuse its discretion by denying Kudron’s request to continue the hearing on the State’s motion for summary disposition, we affirm.

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

            Jamaine Simmons appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and actual innocence.  OPINION HOLDS: Simmons failed to preserve error on his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim and did not carry his burden to show he is actually innocent.  We affirm. 

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

            Dominick Marcott appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief from his conviction entered after a guilty plea.  He argues mainly that his trial counsel failed to advise him of possible constitutional problems with the possession sentencing enhancement under Iowa Code section 124.401(5) (2020).  OPINION HOLDS: Because Marcott has not shown any of his constitutional theories have merit, his counsel did not breach any essential duty by failing to pursue them.  Even if Marcott could identify a breach, he also failed to show that he would have rejected the beneficial plea agreement.  And while Marcott summarily asserts that two other attorneys also provided subpar representation, he did not adequately brief those issues on appeal, so we find the claims waived.  We thus affirm the denial of his application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Faheem Abdul Jabbar appeals the district court’s order denying his application for postconviction relief, arguing his defense counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to advise him that his Alford plea to an aggravated misdemeanor would not prevent the revocation of his parole from a prior sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Jabbar failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for his misunderstanding, he would have rejected the State’s offer and proceeded to trial.  Because Jabbar has not established the prejudice requirement of his ineffective-assistance claim, we affirm the district court’s denial of relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Crystal S. Cronk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral arguments by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Jeremy Dale Lawson appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, alleging his postconviction counsel was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find no structural error, we affirm the dismissal of Lawson’s postconviction relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR DISMISSAL IN PART.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Langholz, J.  (21 pages)

            Sheila Sundall appeals her convictions for introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility and possessing a controlled substance.  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for both convictions.  And she argues that the district court should have granted a new trial on the possession offense because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find substantial evidence does not support the introduction element of introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility, we reverse that conviction.  We find substantial evidence supports the possession charge and affirm that conviction.  And we find that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial as untimely.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Faithfully applying the governing supreme court precedents together, it follows that a person introduces a controlled substance into a detention facility in violation of Iowa Code section 719.8 (2022) when she is arrested carrying a bag concealing drugs, the arresting officer refuses her requests to abandon the bag and instead takes control of it and brings it along with the person into the facility, and the person chooses not to tell law enforcement of the drugs in the bag.  The jury could have found that Sundall did just that.  She was arrested carrying her bag concealing methamphetamine, unsuccessfully tried to get the officer to leave the bag on the side of the road rather than putting it in the front seat of the car that she knew was taking her to the jail, and still chose not to alert any officer that it contained methamphetamine. I would thus affirm both of Sundall’s convictions.  And so, I respectfully dissent from the part of the majority opinion reversing her conviction for introducing a controlled substance into a detention facility.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Crawford County, James N. Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (2 pages)

            Esteban Velazquez-Ramirez appeals the dismissal of his third application for postconviction relief.  He argues a new ground of law creates an exception to the statute of limitations governing his claim.  OPINION HOLDS: We have previously held that the case Velazquez-Ramirez relies on does not satisfy the “new ground of law” exception.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of his application for postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Paul D. Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The Iowa Department of Revenue (the department) imposed a drug-tax assessment of $18,668.16 against Setra Sumerall; the department later initiated this garnishment action, seeking seized funds being held by the Iowa City Police Department.  Sumerall responded with a motion to quash and a motion to dismiss.  The district court denied Sumerall’s motions, concluding his success in a separate district court proceeding, which decided he had the right to the seized monies over the county attorney’s office, did not foreclose the department from taking possession of the funds.  And because Sumerall failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, the court found he could not challenge the validity of the drug-tax assessment in the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jesse Ramirez, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (6 pages)

Nicole Ruby pled guilty to assault causing bodily injury or mental illness after she deployed chemical spray at a resident in her building without justification.  The district court sentenced her to fourteen days in jail and provided notice Ruby lost her firearm rights.  Ruby appeals, arguing the district court abused its discretion in sentencing her to jail time and challenging the constitutionality of the firearm prohibition, which she contends was a term of her sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: The jail sentence imposed was not unreasonable.  While we agree that the firearm prohibition was a term of her sentence that can be addressed for the first time on direct appeal, we do not reach the merits of Ruby’s constitutional claim because she challenges the statute requiring the firearm prohibition notice, not the statutes that actually prohibit her from carrying dangerous weapons.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (12 pages)

            Dimaryn Ware appeals his convictions for three counts of assault with intent to inflict serious injury and one count each of intimidation with a dangerous weapon with the intent to injure or provoke fear, willful injury causing bodily injury, and felon in possession of a firearm.  Ware challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on all counts, claiming the State failed to prove his participation in the shooting.  He also argues the sentencing court should have merged the willful injury causing bodily injury and assault with intent to inflict serious injury convictions relating to the shooting of M.M.-R.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand with instructions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J. (7 pages)

            Isaiah Cole appeals his conviction and sentence for operating while intoxicated (OWI), second offense.  He claims the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for a mistrial and challenges the adequacy of the court’s colloquy to establish his stipulation to a prior OWI conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Michael Earl Hilson appeals the dismissal of his fourth application for postconviction relief (PCR).  OPINION HOLDS: Because Hilson failed to show the existence of new ground of fact that is relevant to his convictions that could not be raised during the period set forth in section 822.3, we affirm the order dismissing his fourth PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Dr. Ronald Bergman challenges the district court’s decision on judicial review affirming the Iowa Board of Medicine (Board).  Dr. Bergman raises issues on appeal regarding the Board’s authority to enforce a requirement that he complete a neuropsychological evaluation despite the term being included in a settlement agreement he entered into and the Board’s decision to subsequently suspend his medical license as a disciplinary measure for failing to comply with the requirement.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Dr. Bergman’s objections to the terms in the settlement agreement terms are untimely and the Board’s disciplinary actions were within its scope of authority and supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, DeDra Schroeder, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (13 pages)

            Allysa Luke appeals her convictions for child endangerment resulting in death and child endangerment resulting in serious injury.  She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her convictions, and she contends the district court abused its discretion by denying her motion for new trial based on the weight of the evidence, improper statements made by the prosecutor at closing argument, and the admission of cumulative and prejudicial autopsy photos.  OPINION HOLDS: Luke’s convictions are supported by substantial evidence.  The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied her motion for new trial based on the weight of the evidence.  Luke failed to preserve her claims regarding the prosecutor’s statements during closing arguments and admission of the autopsy photos. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa A. Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Buller, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            Samuel Tooson appeals a district court ruling that dismissed his application for postconviction relief as time-barred under section 822.3 (2018).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Tooson’s application, finding no exception to the three-year statute of limitations. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar (motions) and Andrea J. Dryer (trial), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (5 pages)

            An inmate appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss based on violation of his right to a speedy trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient the court’s reasons to continue trial, we affirm the denial of the motion to dismiss.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Joel D. Yates, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Johnnie Boutchee appeals the denial of his postconviction relief application, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to (1) object to a medical provider’s “prejudicial” testimony that related to an assault victim’s injuries the doctor treated five days after the criminal incident at issue occurred and (2) lodge an objection to the racial composition of the jury pool.  OPINION HOLDS: Boutchee failed to show his trial counsel afforded ineffective assistance on either of his claims.  As a result, both ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims fail. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, Judge.  DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (5 pages)

            Padre Leonard contests the calculation of his credit for time served under Iowa Code section 903A.5 (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court accurately determined his days of credit under that statute, we annul the writ of certiorari and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (4 pages)

            Jon Anderson appeals the dismissal of his civil suit alleging pervasive “fraud upon the court” in prior legal proceedings.  OPINION HOLDS: Anderson failed to preserve error on the question of whether he was entitled to entry of default, and his arguments on appeal do not address the dispositive grounds for dismissal.  We decline to make those arguments for him.  We therefore affirm dismissal of Anderson’s petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, James J. Heckerman, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            Randall and Cynthia Main appeal from an order granting summary judgment to Southwest Iowa Planning Council in a foreclosure that stems from a failed grocery store venture.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court’s order was not a final judgment, and we decline to permit an interlocutory appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            Douglas Warburton appeals his sentence following his Alford plea to lascivious acts with a child.  He attempts to raise three issues: (1) the court erred by refusing to resentence him after he filed a motion asking the court to consider a victim impact statement from his family member; (2) the court abused its discretion by considering the recommendation for incarceration contained in the presentence investigation report (PSI) because the recommendation was not adequately supported; and (3) the court abused its discretion by imposing a prison sentence rather than suspending it.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Warburton never appealed from the order denying his request for resentencing, we do not have jurisdiction over his challenge to that order.  Warburton failed to preserve error on his challenge to the PSI because he did not object to its recommendation as lacking a proper basis as he now claims on appeal.  The district court did not abuse its discretion when sentencing Warburton to a term of incarceration because it did not apply a fixed sentencing policy and it weighed relevant sentencing factors when it reached its sentencing determination.

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

A jury found Romell Enoch guilty of first-degree murder in the death of Kylie Duster.  Enoch appeals, arguing there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction regarding the elements he acted with premeditation and had the specific intent to cause the death.  He maintains the evidence established Duster died after he assaulted her following serious provocation, which makes him guilty of voluntary manslaughter—not first-degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the jury’s determination that Enoch committed first-degree murder in the killing of Duster, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Special concurrence by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            Malorie Hallock appeals the sentence imposed following her guilty plea.  She claims the district court abused its discretion when it did not follow the joint sentencing recommendation contained in the plea agreement and considered unproven facts contained in the victim impact statement.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion when it did not adopt the joint sentencing recommendation.  Hallock failed to preserve error on her challenge to the victim impact statement.  Moreover, she cannot establish that the district court considered any unproven fact from the victim impact statement when making its sentencing determination.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I would reject the State’s error preservation argument on the potential use of improper factors based on unproven conduct in the victim impact statement.  Requiring the defendant to object undermines the purpose of the statement and the trust we place in district courts to filter out improper or irrelevant evidence.  On the merits, because the record does not show the court relied on the unproven conduct, I concur specially.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lyon County, John M. Sandy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (18 pages)

            Perry VanDekieft was convicted of sexual abuse in the second degree for his actions against C.L. and sentenced to twenty-five years in prison.  On appeal from the denial of his application for postconviction-relief (PCR), he argues his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to show C.L. had a character for untruthfulness, to object to expert testimony concerning grooming, and to articulate potential motives C.L. had in making sexual abuse allegations.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Perry failed to prove his counsel was ineffective, we affirm the denial of his PCR application.    

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (7 pages)

            Craig Lind appeals his forgery conviction, arguing that the State failed to prove that he knew the check was altered before presenting it to the teller or that he had the specific intent to defraud the bank or knowledge that he was helping to defraud the bank.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict that Lind knew the check was altered and had the specific intent to defraud the bank or knew that he was helping to defraud the bank.  We thus affirm Lind’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

            Deshawn Washington appeals his convictions for second-degree murder and felon in possession of a firearm, contending the State failed to prove he shot and killed Andre Clanton.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the jury’s conclusions that Washington was the shooter and that he possessed a firearm as a prohibited person.  So we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Justin Lightfoot, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (7 pages)

            An applicant appeals the district court’s denial of postconviction relief concerning ineffective-assistance-of-counsel in two cases.  He asserts that in each case he was not adequately advised of potential immigration consequences before pleading guilty and raises claims concerning a motion in arrest of judgment in one case.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 

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

            Megan Jordan appeals from the district court’s ruling on Linn County’s motion for summary judgment, arguing summary judgment was in error because the County’s conduct in transporting a jail inmate was misfeasance and she was a foreseeable victim—thus, the public-duty doctrine does not apply.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the public-duty doctrine applies and Jordan has not identified any acts of misfeasance by the County, the district court committed no legal error in granting summary judgment for the County.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brendan Greiner, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Kelsey Littleton filed suit against Tyler Hansen in small claims court.  Because he was not served with original notice within the ninety-day period required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.302(5), Hansen filed a motion to dismiss.  The small claims court denied the motion.  Hansen appealed to the district court, which affirmed the denial.  Hansen’s application for discretionary review was granted by the supreme court, and the case was transferred to our court.  On appeal, Hansen contends the district court erred in affirming the denial of his motion to dismiss.  OPINION HOLDS: Littleton failed to meet her burden to establish good cause for the delay in service.  Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the district court for an entry of order dismissing Littleton’s cause of action without prejudice.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals from a custody decree placing physical care of his child with the child’s mother.  OPINIONS HOLDS: We affirm, finding it is in the best interests of the child for the mother to have physical care. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Ashley Schuler appeals from a decree establishing paternity, custody, physical care, visitation, and child support.  Schuler challenges the district court’s order of physical care of the parties’ child with the father, Michael Welch, and claims the court incorrectly imputed her income for child-support purposes.  Michael cross-appeals, claiming the court erred by awarding mid-week visitation to Ashley and ordering him to pay half of Ashley’s trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we find the district court’s factual determinations are supported by the record and affirm the physical-care and visitation decisions and child-support calculation.  We modify the decree to strike the award of trial attorney fees, which were not authorized by statute.  We deny the parties’ requests for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, John M. Wright, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (5 pages)

            Keenan Glasgow appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea, claiming the prosecutor breached the plea agreement.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, Myron Gookin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (6 pages)

            Judah Bolser appeals his conviction for second-degree burglary, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (3 pages)

            A property owner appeals the dismissal of his claims.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A father challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination because the child could not be safely returned to the father’s custody at the time of the termination hearing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (10 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the statutory and best‑interests determinations support termination and none of the father’s arguments against termination have merit, we affirm the termination of his parental rights.

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

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights.  She challenges only the court’s denial of her request for additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The record does not support a finding that the need for removal would be resolved within the additional six-month period requested.  Accordingly, we affirm the juvenile court’s order denying the mother’s request for additional time and terminating her parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, Shawna L. Ditsworth, Judge. AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a toddler daughter.  He raises a slew of arguments.  OPINION HOLDS: The only argument preserved and not waived is that termination would be detrimental to the child due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  That statutory exception does not work to prevent termination because the father did not show that the disadvantage of termination outweighs the harm posed by placing the toddler back in her father’s care while he is using drugs.  So we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  She claims the State failed to prove one of the grounds for termination cited by the district court and termination is not in the child’s best interests due to the parent-child bond.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Crystal Randolph appeals the district court’s dismissal of her dissolution petition and its entry of a child-custody order under Iowa Code chapter 600B (2020) after finding that she failed to prove a common-law marriage with Jeremy Musso.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving appropriate deference to the district court’s factual findings and its determination that neither party is credible, we agree that Randolph failed to prove a common-law marriage.  The parties’ many shifting assertions of married and single status in different contexts reflect an intent to serve their personal convenience or financial benefit—not a present intent and agreement to be married.  We thus affirm the district court’s order.

            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 Langholz, J.  (8 pages)

            Anthony Leo appeals a jury verdict finding that Lynn Nelson and Des Moines Orthopaedic Surgeons, P.C., were not liable for medical malpractice, arguing that the court erred in instructing the jury on alternative methods of treatment.  OPINION HOLDS: Competing expert testimony at trial provided substantial evidence that there were two methods of treatment for post-operative imaging.  And so, the district court did not err in giving the jury the challenged alternative-methods-of-treatment instruction.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Fae Hoover Grinde, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (8 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for voluntary manslaughter, arguing insufficient evidence supports the conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, we find substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that Flowers intentionally struck and killed the victim.  We similarly conclude that the jury’s erroneous provocation finding worked a benefit to Flowers, which is not reversible error.  Thus, we affirm Flowers’s conviction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (3 pages)

            Juan Delagarza appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  He claims he received ineffective assistance from his criminal trial counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court’s rationale in denying Delagarza’s claims, so we do not elaborate on its rationale and determination that trial counsel provided Delagarza with effective assistance.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Adria Kester, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Gustaf Carlson appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief, claiming his guilty plea in the underlying criminal action was not voluntary.  OPINION HOLDS: Carlson cannot raise this claim for the first time in a postconviction-relief action because he provides no justification as to why he did not raise the claim previously by filing a motion in arrest of judgment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Kathleen A. Kilnoski, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (4 pages)

            Terrance Burnett appeals the dismissal of his third post-conviction (PCR) relief application.  He raises four arguments on appeal: (1) a new ground of law creates an exception to the statute of limitations governing his claim; (2) the statute of limitations violates article I, section 13 of the Iowa Constitution; (3) the 2019 amendments to the statute of limitations are unconstitutional and equitable tolling should be applied to make his application timely; and (4) his PCR trial counsel in this case was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS: Burnett’s first two arguments have already been rejected by this court and the Iowa Supreme Court.  We have previously held that the case Burnett relies on does not satisfy the “new ground of law” exception, and our Supreme Court has rejected the argument that the statute of limitations violates the Iowa Constitution.  Because these arguments fail, Burnett’s application is time-barred.  His equitable tolling argument and challenge to 2019 statutory amendments were not raised before the district court and are not preserved for our review.  As his application is untimely, we cannot reach the merits of his ineffective-assistance claim.  For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of Burnett’s PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (5 pages)

            Lawrence McCoy argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment dismissing his postconviction relief application.  Specifically, he argues that his claim of actual innocence is not barred by the statute of limitations based upon newly discovered evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to McCoy, he has not generated a sufficient question of fact to survive summary dismissal.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, Laura J. Parrish, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (5 pages)

            Ryan Parmely appeals from his conviction for first-offense OWI, arguing that he was not properly advised of the fact that his commercial driver’s license would be revoked upon his conviction and that he thus did not voluntarily enter his guilty plea.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Parmely waived his right to move in arrest of judgment, we lack appellate jurisdiction and dismiss his appeal. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (13 pages)

            Johnathon (John) Sprague appeals the district court’s order enforcing a settlement agreement drafted by his ex-wife, Lanora Sprague.  John contends no binding settlement existed because the version enforced by the court omitted terms regarding the children’s transportation and extracurricular activities—terms he asserts were orally agreed to during an informal settlement conference.  Lanora requests John to pay her appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: There is no record of the settlement conference, or the terms purportedly agreed to that day, nor is there a transcript or evidentiary record from the hearing on Lanora’s motion to enforce the settlement.  As a result, we have no basis on which to assess the parties’ competing claims.  Without an evidentiary record to support the district court’s decision, the order enforcing the settlement agreement is not supported by substantial evidence.  Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order granting Lanora’s motion to enforce settlement and remand for further proceedings.  We deny Lanora’s request for appellate attorney fees.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I dissent because appeals aren’t supposed to be do-overs after you fail to make a record below.  In my view, the majority opinion decides this case backwards and reverses a district court ruling with inadequate record for us to conduct meaningful appellate review.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Joel Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (5 pages)

            Shine Acaso Olson appeals the sentence imposed after pleading guilty to lascivious acts with a child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the court did not consider an improper factor nor did it abuse its discretion by applying a fixed sentencing policy as alleged by Olson, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, David Faith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (13 pages)

            Cindy Randel appeals her convictions for four drug-related offenses, conflating her challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence with her claim that the district court erred in denying her motion for new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient evidence supporting Randel’s convictions and any challenge to the weight of the evidence both unpreserved and waived on appeal, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Joseph Sobolik appeals the summary dismissal of his application for postconviction relief (PCR), claiming the court erred in denying his claim that “the State’s destruction of [DNA] evidence was done by bad faith and required a new trial.”  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the dismissal of Sobolik’s PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (6 pages)

            David Powell Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  He argues the court erred in rejecting his claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel during his probation-revocation hearing.  Alternatively, if this court agrees with the district court, Powell contends that his failure was due to ineffective assistance from his PCR trial counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Powell has not met the burden of showing prejudice resulting from the probation-revocation counsel’s performance.  We affirm the denial of Powell’s PCR application.  We decline to consider his claim of ineffective assistance of PCR counsel.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, James C. Ellefson, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            Central Iowa Investors, L.C. (CII) appeals the judgment for damages stemming from a lease dispute with Brookstone Specialty Services, Inc.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court awarded damages that fall within the permissible range of evidence in the record.  Because substantial evidence supports the amount of damages awarded on CII’s breach-of-contract claim, we affirm in part.  But the district court erred by denying CII attorney fees and costs based on its nominal recovery of damages.  The contract expressly provides that CII may recuperate attorney fees and costs related to recovery of unpaid rent and regaining possession of the premises.  We reverse the district court’s denial of attorney fees and costs, and remand to the district court for further proceedings to determine an appropriate award.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            Cody Smith appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief challenging his 2022 conviction for aggravated assault.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err by granting summary disposition in favor of the State under Iowa Code section 822.6(3) (2023).  Because Smith never raised the court’s failure to rule on a claim of actual innocence in a motion to enlarge under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(2), his claim of error is not preserved for appeal.  DISSENT ASSERTS: My reading of the record does not support the majority’s finding that Smith was given notice of the motion and an opportunity to respond.  I would reverse the ruling granting summary disposition and remand for further proceedings to allow Smith an opportunity to respond to the State’s motion. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Kossuth County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A jury convicted Kyle Ricke of first-degree murder for shooting Officer Kevin Cram of the Algona Police Department eight times, resulting in his death.  Ricke appeals, contending that the State failed to prove he acted with deliberation and premeditation.  He asks that we vacate his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding substantial evidence showing Ricke’s conduct was deliberate and premeditated, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sac County, Ashley Sparks, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (15 pages)

            Stacey Ernst appeals her award of spousal support, arguing the award did not consider the total income of her former spouse, Todd, and calculated her income with overtime, which was inappropriate.  Both spouses ask for attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court’s method of determining spousal support was unorthodox and erroneous, we amend the spousal support payment and award attorney fees to Stacey. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt (dismissal of § 1983 claim and reconsideration of initial dismissal order) and Colleen Weiland (dismissal of other claims), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Scott Luke appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his claims under the statute of limitations and for lack of standing.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Luke was not the administrator of his son’s estate, no provision tolled the two-year limitations period for his § 1983 and loss-of-consortium claims, and Luke failed to properly exhaust his tort claims against the State, the district court properly dismissed his suit.  And we remind self-represented litigants and attorneys alike that they have a duty to independently verify the accuracy of all sources and assertions when relying on artificial intelligence tools to assist with drafting trial or appellate court filings. 

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

            Philip Oxendine pleaded guilty to four offenses.  The district court imposed the maximum sentence for each offense and ordered the sentences to run consecutively.  On appeal, Oxendine argues that the district court abused its discretion by applying a fixed sentencing policy.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court neither relied on a single factor nor followed a fixed sentencing policy in deciding to impose consecutive sentences.  We find no abuse of discretion by the district court and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (3 pages)

            David Nestler appeals the district court’s summary judgment order dismissing his petition for injunctive relief and denying his request for attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: None of Nestler’s claims are preserved for our review.  We therefore affirm the order of the district court without reaching the merits.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, Shayne Mayer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (5 pages)

            Tammy Steiner appeals her sentence following a guilty plea, claiming that the district court relied on an improper sentencing factor.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of the court’s discretion, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (5 pages)

            Amanda Felten appeals her conviction for third-degree burglary, arguing the conviction is not supported by substantial evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supported the jury verdict, we affirm Felten’s conviction. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (4 pages)

            Kristine Eckhardt appeals the sentence imposed following her guilty plea for theft.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that the district court considered the sentencing options listed in Iowa Code section 901.5 (2023) and affirm Eckhardt’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (12 pages)

            Matthew Marchesano appeals from an order establishing paternity, custody, physical care, visitation, child support, and trial attorney fees.  Matthew challenges the district court’s order of physical care of the parties’ two children with their mother, Taria Dillon, and claims the court incorrectly calculated his income for child-support purposes.  Matthew also challenges the court’s award of trial attorney fees to Taria.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm the court’s order and remand for an award of appellate attorney fees to Taria.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Schumacher, J. (32 pages)

            The State and relative intervenors appeal orders of the juvenile court granting respite-care providers’ motion to intervene in child-in-need-of-assistance proceedings, identifying them as fictive kin, ordering placement with the fictive kin, and denying the relative intervenors’ request for concurrent jurisdiction.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review, we affirm the juvenile court’s orders.  PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I join with the majority in affirming the district court’s denial of the intervenor’s motion for concurrent jurisdiction, the portion of the majority’s opinion which finds the State’s claim on the attachment survey to be waived, and the conclusion that the district court’s analysis under Iowa Code section 232.102(1)(b)(2) was unnecessary.  But I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion as to the motion to intervene by the respite-care providers and the portion of the dispositional order which placed L.P with the respite-care providers instead of a relative placement.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Richard H. Davidson, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Jared Foote appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to set aside a default decree in a custody matter, arguing that the default decree improperly transferred custody to Nikki Wilson without a hearing or any evidence addressing the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court should have conducted an evidentiary hearing to receive evidence of what physical care arrangement would be in the children’s best interests, we affirm the default judgment and determination of joint legal custody but reverse the decree to remand for the limited purposes of conducting a prompt evidentiary hearing on the issues of physical custody, visitation, and child support.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, 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.  OPINION HOLDS: Because a statutory ground for termination was met, termination is in the best interests of the child, and we decline to apply any alternatives or permissive exceptions to prevent termination, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to her child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            A mother and father each appeal the termination of their parental rights to their four children.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court.  The State proved the statutory grounds for terminating the mother’s and father’s parental rights under paragraphs “f” and “h” of Iowa Code section 232.116(1) (2024) because the children could not be returned to either parent’s care at the time of the termination hearing.  And termination of their parental rights is in the best interests of the children because the parents have shown over the past twelve years of juvenile-court involvement that they are unable to make any long-lasting changes that would provide the children with stability.  And the children are finally receiving that stability and permanence in their foster home after all these years.  We thus affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals a modified dispositional order removing three children from his custody.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court that keeping the children in the home jeopardizes their safety and is contrary to their welfare.  Though the father insists he has made strides, the children were initially removed for poor supervision, and after two years of services, those concerns persist.  Placing the children’s safety at the forefront, we thus affirm the juvenile court’s modified dispositional order removing the children from the father’s custody.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Parents jointly appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  They challenge one of the statutory grounds for termination, claim termination is not in the child’s best interests due to the parent-child bond, and request an additional six months to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s combined adjudicatory and dispositional order.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that the child is imminently likely to suffer harmful effects and inadequate care due to the mother’s unaddressed substance use and affirm his adjudication under Iowa Code section 232.96A(3) and (14) (2025).  For the same reasons, we find that the child’s placement outside the mother’s care is the least restrictive disposition.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Jennifer S. Bailey, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and her child separately appeal the termination of the mother’s parental rights, challenging the best‑interests determination and asking us to apply permissive exceptions to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because termination is in the best interests of the child 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 Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s termination of his parental rights, arguing that the State did not present clear and convincing evidence for the grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), (e), and (f) (2025); that termination is not in the child’s best interests; and, alternatively, that the juvenile court should have applied exceptions to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm termination of the father’s parental rights to the child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, contending that the State failed to meet its burden to show a statutory basis for termination and that termination is in the best interests of the child.  She asks this court to apply a permissive exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We address the mother’s third argument—asking this court to apply a permissive exception—because we find it is her only argument properly formulated for review.  We find a permissive exception is not warranted and affirm the decision of the juvenile court.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to two children.  Both challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination and request that a guardianship be established as an alternative to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm on both appeals. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Valerie L. Clay, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A homeowners association appeals the dismissal of its claim against an estate as time barred.  It asserts equitable relief from that deadline based on “peculiar circumstances” under Iowa Code section 633.410(3) (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: The probate court erred in applying an abandoned test to demonstrate peculiar circumstances under that code section.  We find that “good conscience and fair dealing” require that the association have a hearing on the merits.  So we reverse and remand to the probate court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Lar G. Anderson and Chad Kepros, Judges.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (16 pages)

            Unbridled Spirits Thoroughbred Retirement Ranch, Inc. (Unbridled) appeals the district court ruling dismissing its claims brought against Carl and Elizabeth Riechers for failure to obtain counsel.  On appeal, Unbridled argues the district court incorrectly concluded that a nonprofit corporation cannot be represented by a non-attorney employee in a civil action.  Thus, it argues its claims were properly dismissed.  Additionally, Unbridled contends the district court erred by dismissing its claims with prejudice.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review of the record, we affirm the district court’s ruling dismissing Unbridled claims for failure to obtain counsel.  However, we conclude the district court erred by dismissing Unbridled’s claims with prejudice. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Angela L. Doyle, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (4 pages)

            The plaintiffs appeal the judgment entered for the defendant on claims for damages arising from a motor vehicle collision.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the plaintiffs failed to disclose the information required under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.500(2)(c) for treating physicians testifying as expert witnesses, the district court properly limited their testimony.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, Shayne Mayer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (12 pages)

            A jury found Francisco Javier Lopez Escoto Jr. guilty of second-degree sexual abuse.  On appeal, he argues (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction; (2) the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial based on an alleged error on the verdict form; and (3) the exclusion of certain evidence violated his constitutional right to present a defense.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports Lopez Escoto’s conviction for second-degree sexual abuse.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial based on the verdict form.  Nor did the court abuse its discretion or violate his constitutional right by excluding evidence that third parties had access to the child.  Accordingly, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for criminal mischief.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the conviction, and we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Shawn Showers, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            On appeal, a husband argues that the district court erred by setting temporary child support without making a finding as to his income.  He also contends the district court should have ordered the wife to pay temporary spousal support.  The wife asks us to affirm the district court’s ruling and requests an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse and remand for further proceedings to resolve the dispute over the husband’s income and, after making written findings, to recalculate the temporary child support obligation.  We affirm the district court’s denial of the husband’s request for temporary spousal support and deny the wife’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Nearly forty years after procedendo issued on his two convictions for first-degree murder, Jack Losee filed his sixth application for postconviction relief (PCR).  The district court dismissed Losee’s application as time-barred, which Losee challenges on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the summary dismissal of Losee’s sixth PCR application. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Jason D. Besler, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Brannon Johnson appeals his conviction for second-degree murder.  He claims that the district court (1) abused its discretion when it denied his motion for new trial based on the weight of the evidence, (2) abused its discretion by not permitting him to introduce certain impeachment evidence, and (3) abused its discretion by denying his motion for mistrial after the prosecutor accidentally published an autopsy photo for a moment.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court applied the correct standard when considering Johnson’s motion for new trial and did not abuse its discretion when it denied the motion.  The district court did not abuse its discretion when it did not admit the impeachment evidence without proper foundation.  And the district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the motion for mistrial.  Accordingly, we affirm Johnson’s conviction for second-degree murder.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Kirk Daily, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Olen Brown appeals his convictions and sentences for assault on a peace officer causing bodily injury and interference with official acts causing bodily injury, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and that he was deprived of a fair and impartial jury.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding substantial evidence supports his verdicts and his juror challenge was not preserved.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL; WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (14 pages)

            Jay Breuer appeals an order modifying the legal-custody provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Angela Breuer.  He claims the district court erred in granting Angela’s request for sole legal custody of the parties’ children.  Angela cross-appeals, challenging the court’s finding her in contempt of certain portions of the decree.  Both parties contest the court’s awards of trial attorney fees and request appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm on appeal and cross-appeal, annul the writ of certiorari, and decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, Charles Borth, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            Mitchel Harris Duskin appeals his convictions for sexual abuse, contending the court erred in its evidentiary and proposed‑jury‑instruction rulings and challenging the sufficiency and weight of the evidence supporting his convictions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court neither erred nor abused its discretion and there is sufficient evidence supporting the verdicts, we affirm Duskin’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Trevon Lucas filed a petition for postconviction relief, alleging that his criminal trial counsel was ineffective and that he was actually innocent.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find trial counsel performed competently and the evidence on the record does not supply clear proof that Lucas is actually innocent, we affirm his convictions.

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

            A complainant appeals from judicial review of a decision made by the Iowa Public Information Board dismissing his complaints as legally insufficient.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (5 pages)

            More than twenty years after procedendo issued on his convictions for first- and second-degree sexual abuse, Larry Kennedy filed his fourth application for postconviction relief (PCR).  The district court dismissed the application as untimely, which Kennedy appeals.  He argues (1) he raised a new ground of fact that overcomes the statute of limitations; (2) the statute of limitations is unconstitutional on its face in light of recent Supreme Court precedent; and (3) PCR counsel provided ineffective assistance that resulted in the dismissal of his fourth PCR application.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the summary dismissal of Kennedy’s fourth PCR application. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (11 pages)

            Jennifer Carroll appeals following her convictions for interference with official acts while displaying a dangerous weapon (Count I), interference with official acts causing bodily injury (Count II), and assault on persons engaged in certain occupations (Count III).  Carroll challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her conviction under Count II and claims her conviction under Count III should merge with her conviction under Count II.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Kevin Lane appeals his conviction for driving while license denied or revoked.  Lane claims the district court erred by failing to grant his motion for judgment of acquittal, granting the State’s motion to reopen the record, and “adding in an extra instruction to fill in the State’s gap in evidence.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monona County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Ahlers, Badding, and Buller, JJ., and Carr, S.J.  Schumacher, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Carr, S.J.  Special concurrence by Buller, J.  (14 pages)

            The State appeals the district court’s ruling on Randy Lavern Lee’s application for postconviction relief.  The district court held that Lee’s trial counsel was ineffective (1) for “failing to seek to introduce evidence concerning the victim’s sexual comments reflecting her state of mind”; (2) for failing to hire an expert in “false allegations of sexual abuse”; (3) for failing to obtain the victim’s medical records, and more specifically her mental health records; and (4) through the cumulative prejudice of his errors.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Lee failed to establish his trial counsel was ineffective or that he was prejudiced by his trial counsel’s alleged failures, we reverse the order granting PCR and remand to the district court for dismissal of Lee’s application.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I write separately to emphasize that the victim’s statement was not an invitation to sex or relevant to consent.  This case is a reminder that cultural sensitivity by courts extends to language and understanding how words are used in modern syntax.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, Shane M. Wiley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (12 pages)

            A jury convicted Craig Rockenbach of voluntary manslaughter for killing his eighty-four-year-old father.  Rockenbach appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence on two fronts.  First, he argues that the State failed to prove his actions caused or directly contributed to his father’s death.  Second, he contends that there was no evidence he was responding to a serious provocation.  He asks that we vacate his conviction and remand for dismissal or for entry of judgment on involuntary manslaughter.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding substantial evidence to support causation and no reversible error in the jury’s finding of provocation, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Emmet County, Shayne Mayer, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Schumacher, Chicchelly, Langholz, JJ., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  Dissent by Tabor, C.J.  (14 pages).

            On interlocutory review, defendant‑appellants appeal the denial of their pre‑answer motion to dismiss.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicable statute of limitations has passed, we reverse the court’s finding and remand with instructions to dismiss the claims as time‑barred.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I agree with my colleagues that the two-year limitations period in Iowa Code section 670.5 applies to all three counts in the petition brought by Scheevel’s victims.  But the injury here was not Scheevel’s improper use of the criminal history database; it was the impact that improper use had on the people whose data he accessed or disseminated.  Scheevel’s victims should not be barred from pursuing claims when their injuries arose within two years of filing their petition.  For these reasons, I would affirm and remand for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Steven J. Holwerda, Judge.  CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCES VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Cody Minenga appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to second-degree harassment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not particularly state its reasons for imposing consecutive sentences, we vacate Minenga’s sentences and remand for resentencing. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J. (5 pages)

            Falon Kapayou appeals her convictions after a conditional guilty plea, challenging the district court’s denial of her motion to dismiss for an alleged speedy-indictment violation.  OPININON HOLDS: Because Kapayou’s arguments on appeal are different than those she argued before—and were decided by—the district court, she has failed to preserve error for our review.  And even setting that problem aside, her failure to cite authority in support of her position that being arrested by or appearing before one sovereign constitutes an arrest by or initial appearance before the separate sovereign of the State of Iowa waives any claim of error.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A records-seeker appeals the dismissal of his complaint under Iowa Code chapter 22 (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: Finding Iowa Code section 670.4A does not apply and this case falls into an exception to res judicata, we reverse and remand.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (4 pages)

            Helen Arndt appeals her conviction for driving while revoked, claiming the district court wrongly denied her motion to suppress under the United States and Iowa Constitutions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because her window tint provided reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop, the district court correctly denied Arndt’s motion to suppress.

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

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm as a felon.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

            Tyler Marshall contends the district court abused its discretion in considering allegedly improper factors in declining to grant him a deferred judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion by the district court, we affirm. 

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

            Jessie Hill appeals from his sentence, arguing the district court abused its discretion in failing to follow the requirements of Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 2.10 when imposing his sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court expressly followed the terms permitted by the agreement, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Robert J. Richter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J. and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Alexis May Haupert appeals the sentence imposed after pleading guilty to assault with intent to inflict serious injury, contending the sentencing court failed to comply with rule 2.10 and abused its sentencing discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not err or abuse its discretion, we affirm Haupert’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Howard County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (14 pages)

                Jeffrey and Shirlee Haw appeal the denial of their petition to enjoin the City of Cresco’s alleged violations of an access easement.  OPINION HOLDS: Although the language of the easement is facially ambiguous, we agree with the district court’s interpretation based on the circumstances surrounding the easement’s creation and the purpose for which it was granted.  We find that the Haws are not entitled to cross the City’s lots at all points along the parties’ shared boundary and that, consequently, the City’s fence does not unreasonably interfere with the Haws’ access right.  We affirm the denial of injunctive relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, David Faith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral arguments by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (6 pages)

            Michael Page appeals his conviction for willful injury causing serious injury, arguing the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss.  Page contends the State violated his right to speedy trial by pursuing willful injury charges after an earlier criminal proceeding against him for attempted murder was dismissed.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not err in concluding willful injury causing serious injury is a different offense than attempted murder for speedy trial purposes, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Greg Milani, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.   Opinion by Langholz, J.  (9 pages)

            Michelle Ralls and Aaron Smart each separately appeal a custody order under Iowa Code chapter 600B (2022).  Ralls challenges the district court’s placement of their son in the parties’ joint physical care rather than in her physical care.  And Smart challenges the court’s denial of his request to change the son’s last name from Ralls to Smart.  OPINION HOLDS:  On our de novo review—giving due deference to the district court’s first-hand view of the evidence and witnesses—we agree that joint physical care is in the son’s best interest.  The parties have proven capable of co-parenting and do not exhibit the degree of strife that renders joint physical care unworkable or detrimental to the son.  As for the son’s last name, assuming the court had authority to consider this name-change request under chapter 600B even though Ralls did not unilaterally select the name, we agree with the court that the change is not in the son’s best interest.  The son has had this last name for ten years, he shares it with his half-sister, and preserving his identity promotes consistency, convenience, and stability for the son.  We thus affirm the district court’s order on both the appeal and cross-appeal.  And we decline Smart’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (4 pages)

            Laura Mangrich appeals her sentences for second-degree theft and unauthorized use of a credit card.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing concurrent suspended sentences rather than deferred judgments.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Michael Motto, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (5 pages)

            Debbie Broom appeals her sentence following her conviction for third-degree theft.  She contends the court abused its discretion when it imposed its sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion in the court’s sentencing decision, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Brook Jacobsen, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Christian argues that his sentence, as imposed, is illegal as, according to him, the State violated his right to speedy trial contained in Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.33(2) and that violation makes his sentence illegal.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Christian failed to show good cause and, as a result, this court does not have jurisdiction over his appeal.  Christian also failed to preserve error to his argument on appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Michael Harris, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (2 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of his second application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the application was filed outside the statute of limitations, we affirm by memorandum opinion. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (11 pages)

            A plaintiff appeals a summary judgment ruling dismissing his premises-liability claims under judicial estoppel.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the plaintiff knew of his premises-liability claims before and during his Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings but never disclosed them to the bankruptcy court or his creditors, judicial estoppel bars him from pursuing these undisclosed claims.  Thus, we affirm summary judgment for the defendants.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Rustin Davenport, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Allison L. Hanson appeals the physical‑care provision of her decree dissolving her marriage to Justin L. Hanson.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find that physical care with Justin is in the best interests of the children, we affirm.  We also decline to award either party trial or appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the denial of his petition to modify custody of his seven­year-old daughter, contending that the level of animosity between the parents was not contemplated when the custody decree was last modified in 2021.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father did not show that the persistent parental conflicts marked a substantial change in circumstances, we affirm the district court’s refusal to modify the decree.  We remand for further proceedings to determine appropriate appellate attorney fees for the mother’s defense of the custody decree.

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

            Andrew Briggs appeals from a district court modification order that placed his child in the physical care of the child’s mother, Kaitlyn Richter.  Andrew agrees that there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances to warrant a change from a joint physical care arrangement to placement of the child in the physical care of one of her parents.  He argues the district court should have placed the child in his physical care instead of Kaitlyn’s.  Kaitlyn requests Andrew be ordered to pay her appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Kaitlyn’s flexible work schedule is more conducive to caring for the child day-to-day than Andrew’s second-shift work schedule.  We affirm the district court’s decision to place the child in Kaitlyn’s physical care.  And we decline to award Kaitlyn appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Joseph McCarville, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order adjudicating her two minor sons as children in need of assistance.  The mother contends the evidence was insufficient to support the statutory ground for adjudication.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm. 

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination and requesting additional time for reunification efforts.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A parent appeals the continued removal of a child from the home.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Decatur County, Monty Franklin and Jordan Brackey, Judges.  AFFIRMED ON THE FATHER’S APPEAL; REVERSED AND REMANDED ON THE MOTHER’S APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Special concurrence by Greer, P.J.  (21 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights, finding that the statutory grounds for termination were met, termination was in the children’s best interests, the parent-child bond did not outweigh the safety concerns supporting termination, and the father was not entitled to additional time for reunification.  On the mother’s appeal, we find the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying the mother’s motion for a new termination hearing and to reopen the record after the death of the juvenile court judge who presided over the hearing and appointment of a successor judge under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.1802(2).  We reverse the ruling terminating the mother’s parental rights and remand with instructions to grant her motion for a new termination hearing and to reopen the record.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in the result and reasoning of the majority opinion; I write separately to highlight the extreme physical distance between the mother and the children’s four placements and its impact on the reunification process.   As this case illustrates, the current system—with the growing foster home shortage and the limitations on resources—is not child-centered in its application. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother challenges the juvenile court order adjudicating her sixteen-year-old daughter as a child in need of assistance (CINA).  She contends the State failed to offer clear and convincing evidence supporting the statutory grounds for adjudication.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding ample evidence to support the juvenile court’s adjudication order, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Mark Schlenker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to D.A., born in 2022, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) and (h) (2024).  The mother appeals, asserting (1) she should have been given additional time to work toward reunification; (2) the juvenile court should have denied the termination petition and instead reinstated the bridge order that was entered to close the family’s previous child-welfare care; (3) the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify her with the child; and (4) the State did not prove the statutory ground for termination pursuant to section 232.116(1)(h).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son, challenging the statutory grounds for termination, claiming termination is not in the child’s best interests, and asking us to apply permissive exceptions to preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Scott Strait, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, challenging the statutory grounds authorizing termination.  OPINION HOLDS: The child could not be returned to the mother’s custody due to the mother’s longstanding and unresolved methamphetamine use, establishing a statutory ground for termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Montgomery County, Ashley West-Joons, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient evidence supports the ground for termination and rejecting the parents’ other challenges, we affirm on both appeals.

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because termination in the best interests of the child and her reasonable‑efforts challenge is waived, we affirm termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (9 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her four children.  The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his two children.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Keokuk County, Patrick McAvan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother challenges the termination of her parental rights to her daughter based on the juvenile court’s best interest determination.  OPINION HOLDS: Due to the mother’s unresolved substance use and minimal participation in services, we find that termination is in the child’s best interest and affirm the juvenile court’s ruling. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, arguing that (1) the State failed to establish a statutory ground for termination, (2) a permissive exception should apply due to the closeness of her relationship with the child, and (3) the juvenile court erred in denying her request for additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Although the mother consistently participated in supervised visitation during the three months leading to the termination hearing, she failed to make meaningful progress in addressing her longstanding issues with methamphetamine use.  In addition to her unresolved substance-use problem, the mother also failed to adequately address issues related to her mental health, lack of stable housing, lack of employment, and domestic violence in her home.  As such the child could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody, establishing a statutory ground for termination.  We decline to apply a permissive exception to preclude termination and do not grant the mother any additional time to work towards reunification.

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

            A mother appeals a juvenile court bridge order.  OPINION HOLDS: The mother failed to make any substantive arguments on appeal, so we consider them waived and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Bethany Currie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            Joshua Uranga appeals his conviction for violation of sex offender registry requirements, a class “D” felony, pursuant to Iowa Code sections 692A.103, .105, and .111 (2021).  Uranga argues there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction and that the district court erred in failing to instruct the jury that the State had to prove that Uranga stayed away from his principal residence for more than five days.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State presented sufficient evidence to convict Uranga as charged, no error in the district court’s entry of judgment on the jury verdict finding Uranga guilty of a violation under Iowa Code section 692A.105, and no error in the district court’s instructions to the jury.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (12 pages)

            Dontaye Burton appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and first-degree robbery, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict and therefore affirm Burton’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (8 pages)

            Henry Dinkins appeals his convictions of first-degree murder and first-degree kidnapping.  OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, substantial evidence supports the court’s findings that Dinkins removed the ten-year-old victim from his apartment, transported her to a pond, and killed her.  Thus, we affirm his convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lawrence McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (17 pages)

            Dustin Sample appeals his first-degree-murder conviction for killing his wife.  He challenges four evidentiary rulings and argues that the jury’s verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting text messages between Sample and the victim about his prior abuse of her or the testimony of her coworkers about the prior abuse as prior bad acts under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.404(b).  The court also correctly ruled that the residual hearsay exception under rule 5.807 applied to the statements that the victim made to her coworkers about Sample’s prior abuse.  And it correctly excluded the text messages between Sample and the victim about their drinking history that Sample offered under the residual hearsay exception because admission was not necessary.  We cannot reach the merits of Sample’s last evidentiary challenge—to an officer’s testimony about his demeanor—because it is not preserved or adequately briefed on appeal.  Finally, the court did not abuse its wide discretion in denying Sample’s motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.  We thus affirm Sample’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Charles C. Sinnard, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            Donna Cox was charged with possession of controlled substance (methamphetamine) after officers discovered methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia on her person and in her car.  Cox moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that officers impermissibly prolonged the traffic stop by implementing a “systematic approach” where the canine officer called in a second officer to write a citation while the canine officer simultaneously conducted an open air sniff.  She maintained this approach violated her state and federal constitutional rights.  OPINION HOLDS: After review of the record, we find the officers did not impermissibly extend the traffic stop.  Thus, we affirm the denial of the motion to suppress. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, P.J. (9 pages)

            Austin Neuhaus appeals his sentences and challenges the constitutionality of the firearm prohibition under Iowa Code section 724.26(2) (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm Neuhaus’s sentences, finding that the district court did not rely on an improper sentencing factor.  And we deny his constitutional challenges to the firearms prohibition, which was a term of the court’s judgment and sentence order.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (15 pages)

            Joy Trueblood appeals the district court’s summary-judgment ruling dismissing her suit against the Finley Law Firm as barred by claim preclusion and judicial estoppel.  OPINION HOLDS: Trueblood’s claims in her third suit arising from a prior medical-malpractice case all come from the same nucleus of operative facts as her first two, and her alleged wrongs have all been raised before.  So claim preclusion bars her third bite at the apple.  Her claims also turn on her assertion that she was not negligent, but judicial estoppel bars her from contradicting her prior testimony and stipulation that she was liable for negligence.  We thus affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Finley.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Erik I. Howe, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals from a juvenile court order establishing a guardianship over her children, claiming the statutory requirements for the appointment of a guardian have not been met.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is clear and convincing evidence the mother demonstrated a lack of consistent parental participation in the children’s lives, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (24 pages)

            Jennifer Alexander, on behalf of herself and her daughter, C.A., appeals from a district court ruling that granted summary judgment for the defendant insurance companies, Amerigroup Iowa, Inc. and its parent company, Anthem, Inc.  She alleged that in an effort to reduce the cost of C.A.’s care, the insurance companies “caused five wrongful child abuse reports” to be filed against her and “attempted to destroy the familial and legal bond between” her and C.A. by suggesting that she should have her daughter adjudicated as a child in need of assistance.  Alexander brought claims for the insurance companies’ alleged bad faith in administering her daughter’s Medicaid plan under a managed-care contract with what was then known as the Iowa Department of Human Services; negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress; intentional interference with the parent-child relationship; and declaratory relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the district court correctly granted Amerigroup’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Alexander’s petition.  Because neither Alexander nor her daughter, C.A., were third-party beneficiaries of Amerigroup’s managed-care contract with the department, Alexander cannot maintain her claim for Amerigroup’s alleged bad faith in administering C.A.’s Medicaid plan.  We agree with the court’s dismissal of Alexander’s emotional-distress claims because the undisputed facts established that Amerigroup is entitled to qualified immunity under Iowa Code section 232.73(1) (2019) for its involvement in child abuse reports against Alexander.  The undisputed facts also established that Amerigroup did not take any action or affirmative effort to abduct C.A. or to compel or induce her to leave Alexander’s custody.  So Alexander’s claim for intentional interference with the parent-child relationship fails as well.  Finally, Alexander did not preserve error on her claims that Amerigroup’s parent company, Anthem, was personally liable for its own tortious actions or that the district court erred in dismissed her prospective claim for declaratory relief. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (6 pages)

            Rodney Dee Brown appeals his conviction after a jury found him guilty of attempting to entice a minor, challenging the district court’s jury‑instruction ruling and the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the court did not err and substantial evidence supports the conviction, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey Farrell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (4 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of new DNA profiling under Iowa Code chapter 81 (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant’s sole issue on appeal is a due-process argument never raised to or decided by the district court, the applicant has not preserved any argument for appellate review.  Thus, the district court is affirmed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  Special concurrence by Greer, P.J.  (12 pages)

            The beneficiaries of Lanny Wenck’s estate appeal the grant of summary judgment in this declaratory judgment proceeding, which determined who owned bank accounts owned by Wenck prior to his death.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there are questions of material fact as to whether another person was properly added as an owner with rights of survivorship to Wenck’s consumer bank accounts prior to his death, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the bank and affirm its denial of the beneficiaries’ motion for partial summary judgment.  There is no question of material fact as to whether Wenck gifted two of his companies to an individual prior to his death.  The district court correctly determined that the two companies owned the commercial accounts, so the individual who now owns the two companies was properly added to those accounts.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I disagree with the majority opinion that there are questions of material fact as to whether Lanny orally agreed to add Allen as an owner to Lanny’s consumer accounts.  The unrebutted evidence suggests otherwise.  And unlike the majority, I think the record leaves a question that on the face of the pleadings requires additional development beyond the summary judgment stage.  So, while I agree that the case should be remanded, I would limit the questions to the application of the consumer account agreement only after, if needed for the resolution, the questions about previous ownership is answered.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Derek Johnson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A postconviction relief applicant appeals the dismissal of his application.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding he has not established his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Kathleen A. Kilnoski, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (4 pages)

            Shawn Jenkins appeals the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief, alleging that his first counsel was ineffective for misinforming him about the mandatory minimum sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the district court’s conclusion that Jenkins’s second counsel’s “effective representation of him before and during his plea and sentencing hearing cured any alleged ineffectiveness” of his first counsel.  And for the reasons detailed by the district court, Jenkins has failed to establish prejudice.  So, we affirm with this memorandum opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Jennifer Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            Thomas and Cindy Degner appeal the district court’s decree partitioning heirs property.  They argue that the district court’s partition of one of the nine tracts of land at issue was inequitable.  They also argue that they should receive a ten percent discount on the value of two other tracts of land because they continue to own undivided shares of those tracts with Thomas’s cousin.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court’s partition of the tracts of land is equitable, and no discount is necessary.  As a result, we affirm the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            A real estate contract holder appeals the district court order allowing the property purchaser to prepay on a real estate contract.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the contract did not imply the purchaser had a right to prepay the real estate contract and the perfect-tender-in-time rule applied, we reverse and remand.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J. (10 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for willful injury causing bodily injury, asserting the district court erred in a definition in the stand-your-ground jury instructions.  OPINION HOLDS: We find error was not preserved or was otherwise waived and any preserved error was harmless given overwhelming evidence of guilt.  We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Chicchelly, Langholz, and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  Dissent by Langholz, J. (25 pages)

            A husband appeals the dismissal of his petition against medical providers for the wrongful death of his wife.  Although he is not an attorney, he represented himself as an individual and as the administrator of the estate throughout the district court proceedings, which the court found to be the unauthorized practice of law and dismissed without prejudice.  On appeal, the husband contends he could proceed pro se because his wife died without a will and he was the sole beneficiary of her estate.  Short of that, he contends the district court should have granted his motion to amend his pleading.  OPINION HOLDS: The sole-beneficiary argument was not preserved for appeal.  Dismissal was proper because the wrongful death claims belonged to the estate, and nothing in Iowa law allows an administrator to bring those claims pro se.  The husband engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, and his petition was void and a legal nullity.  Thus, we affirm the dismissal of his action without prejudice.  DISSENT ASSERTS: The district court’s dismissal of this wrongful-death suit without first giving the improperly represented parties the chance to hire a lawyer flouts precedent and the principles underlying our unauthorized-practice-of-law doctrine.  And this error is properly preserved for our review.  So I would reverse the dismissal and remand for the district court to enter an order dismissing the case only if no lawyer appears to represent the plaintiffs within thirty days.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monroe County, Crystal S. Cronk, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (15 pages)

            Brian Hager appeals two rulings of the district court that effectively deprived him of the opportunity to present a hostile work environment claim to a jury.  He contends he sufficiently pled a hostile work environment claim in his original petition.  Thus, he argues the district court erred by denying his request for a proposed jury instruction for a hostile work environment claim.  Alternatively, he asserts the district court abused its discretion in denying his pretrial motion to amend his petition and motion to conform to proof to “add” a hostile work environment claim.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we conclude Hager’s original petition sufficiently pled a hostile work environment claim, we conclude the district court’s ruling on his pretrial motion to amend improperly denied him the opportunity to move forward to trial with such a claim.  Accordingly, we find Hager is entitled to a new trial on a hostile work environment claim.  And because we find this issue to be dispositive, we do not reach Hager’s alternative arguments.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals the sentence imposed following remand, claiming the sentencing court failed to properly weigh an expert evaluation in determining the appropriate sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the court properly weighed the totality of the evidence in imposing sentence, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Jason D. Besler, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  Special concurrence by Sandy, J.  (6 pages)

            Downing appeals a firearm prohibition, imposed shortly after his sentencing order.  He argues the firearm prohibition violates his state and federal constitutional rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the firearm prohibition is not part of his sentence, and as a result, Downing lacks good cause to appeal.  We dismiss his appeal.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: While I join the majority’s well-reasoned opinion, I write separately to highlight the jurisdictional purgatory in which citizens served with firearm prohibition notices find themselves trapped.  The current state of our law makes it unclear whose responsibility it is to review a district court’s issuance of a firearm prohibition notice, which is separate and distinct from that court’s sentencing order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, James A. McGlynn, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            Michael Morrisey appeals from the district court’s judgment and post-judgment orders denying his request for attorney fees and requiring him to pay All Iowa Homes, Inc.’s (AIH) costs from the date of AIH’s offer to confess judgment through the end of the case.  Morrisey argues that the attorney-fees provisions of the real estate purchase agreement between him and AIH did not merge with the deed and the district court’s failure to recognize that merger led it to miscalculate costs.  OPINION HOLDS: Because AIH’s failure to disclose a material defect was a breach of the purchase agreement, the attorney-fees provision does not merge with the deed, and reasonable attorney fees shall be assessed. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John D. Telleen and Henry W. Latham, II, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Buller, J. (10 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals from fifteen convictions and the resulting sentence.  His complaints relate to denial of his motion for new trial, denial of his motion to continue the sentencing hearing, and the court’s exercise of discretion when it sentenced him to prison for two hundred fifty‑five consecutive years.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Michael J. Shubatt and Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Bryant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress, arguing the search of the backpack in the back seat would not be a valid search for “contraband,” because Iowa Code section 321.284(1) (2023) provides that an open container is only illegal if it is “in the passenger area of the motor vehicle.”  He claims any alcohol bottle in the backpack, even if open, could not be considered contraband.  In response, the State argues both subject matter jurisdiction and error preservation.  OPINION FINDS: We find, considering recent Iowa Supreme Court precedent, that this court has subject matter jurisdiction.  On the error preservation issue, Bryant failed to preserve error to his argument on appeal in his motion to suppress.  As a result, we decline to reach the merits of his argument and affirm the decision of the district court. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (12 pages)

            Russell and Diane Paul divorced after a fourteen-year marriage.  In this appeal, Russell challenges three aspects of their divorce decree.  First, he contests the decision to grant physical care of their two children to Diane.  Second, he contends the award of traditional spousal support was inequitable.  And third, Russell argues that the district court erred in ordering him to maintain a minimum balance in his flexible spending account (FSA) for the children’s unreimbursed medical expenses.  In response, Diane defends the decree and seeks appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Following our independent review of the record, we decline to change the children’s physical care.  We also find the spousal support award achieves equity between the parties—though we modify the decree to provide that Russell’s obligation ceases upon his death.  We also modify the decree to terminate Russell’s requirement to maintain life insurance for the benefit of the children when his child-support obligation ends.  Lastly, we affirm the reasonable requirement for Russell to maintain a balance of $1500 per year in his FSA given their daughters’ medical and orthodontic needs.  But because we affirm the spousal support award, we find that Diane has the means to pay her own attorney fees.

            Discretionary review from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (9 pages)

            A criminal defendant attempts to appeal denial of his attorney’s last-minute request to continue sentencing following his guilty plea, claiming the district court violated his constitutional rights or abused its discretion.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the constitutional issue unpreserved, grant discretionary review to address the abuse-of-discretion question, and affirm.

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

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for theft in the third degree, challenging sufficiency of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, based in part on credibility determinations made by the district court as fact-finder.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda M. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (27 pages)

            Victor Nimrick appeals from a dissolution decree dissolving his marriage to Stephanie Nimrick.  He challenges the decree’s protective order restricting his contact with Stephanie, a social-media restriction, the determination placing sole legal custody of three minor children with Stephanie, the physical-care and visitation provisions, the child-support calculation, and the award of attorney fees and related enforcement mechanism.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the social‑media restriction to ensure Victor retains his free-speech rights by having a forum in which he can express derogatory comments about Stephanie if there is no reasonable probability the children will be exposed to or otherwise affected by the comments.  We remand with directions for the district court to enter an order consistent with that holding.  And we otherwise affirm the decree in its entirety. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, MODIFIED IN PART, AND REVERSED IN PART.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            Alex Taylor appeals the decree establishing paternity, custody, visitation, and support of J.T., the child he shares with Amanda Hergenreter.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the decree to award Amanda $28,163.57 in past child support.  We affirm the award of past cash medical support.  Because the court exceeded its authority, we reverse the award of one-half of the parties’ 2018 income tax refund to Amanda.  Finally, we affirm the denial of trial attorney fees and decline to award appellate attorney fees.

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

            Danielle Ladenthin appeals a custody decree that placed her child with Michael Davis in Michael’s physical care.  OPINION HOLDS: Despite Danielle’s history of being the child’s primary caretaker, we conclude that it is in the child’s best interests to be placed in Michael’s physical care.  Michael is an active parent with a safe home who supports the child’s relationship with Danielle.  We accordingly affirm the district court’s physical-care decision.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Humboldt County, Kurt Wilke, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS APPEAL.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (12 pages)

            Two adjoining landowners, Joseph Crossley and Mark Kellner, dispute a fence line acquiescence.  Kellner appeals the finding of boundary by acquiescence by the district court, and Crossley cross‑appeals the directed verdict for his trespass claim and rulings on the admissibility of certain witness testimony.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding substantial evidence supports the establishment of a boundary by acquiescence, that Crossley did not establish damages for trespass, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings on the admissibility of witness testimony, we affirm on appeal and cross‑appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief, which the district court below treated as an illegal-sentence challenge.  OPINION HOLDS: Rejecting the constitutional challenges to the applicant’s sentence, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Mark T. Hostager, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (4 pages)

            Lonnie Hamilton Jr. appeals the sentence imposed after he pled guilty to operating while under the influence, third or subsequent offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding that the district court considered all relevant sentencing factors, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  SENTENCE VACATED AND CASE REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Dissent by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            Lance Battiste appeals his sentence for second-degree theft, arguing that the district court improperly considered unproven conduct in relying on the description of the nature of the offense in the minutes of testimony and improperly considered only a single factor in selecting the sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court improperly considered unproven criminal conduct described in the minutes of testimony to determine the nature of Battiste’s offense and made clear this was a significant factor in the selection of the sentence imposed, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because I do not believe the defendant met his burden to affirmatively show that the district court considered an unproven charge or improper factor when it described the offense as “sophisticated,” I would affirm the sentence imposed by the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            Jared Johanns appeals multiple provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Amanda Johanns.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the provisions of the decree relating to physical care of their child, property division, and trial attorney fees.  We also affirm the default visitation schedule but modify the decree to remove a provision restricting the parties’ use of alcohol while the child is in their care.  Finally, we decline to award either party appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court order terminating his parental rights to his minor son, arguing the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to termination based on the parent-child bond.  Additionally, he asserts the juvenile court should have established a guardianship for his son in lieu of terminating his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, Jessica Noll, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to four children.  He argues that the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services did not provide active efforts under the Iowa Indian Child Welfare Act, that termination is not in the children’s best interests, and that a permissive exception should preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father waited until the termination hearing to object to the active efforts, he has failed to preserve error.  Termination is in the children’s best interest because none of the children are safe in the father’s care, he fails to acknowledge his abuse and harm to the children—even after being convicted of sexual abuse and incest—and they are doing well with their mother.  And no permissive exception is appropriate given the abuse and his lengthy continued incarceration.  We thus affirm termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her three-year-old son, contending that the State failed to offer clear and convincing evidence that he could not safely return to her custody.  She also argues that termination was not in the child’s best interests because they share a strong bond.  OPINION HOLDS: After careful review, we affirm the juvenile court’s well-reasoned termination order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Michael Motto, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing the juvenile court was wrong in finding a statutory basis for termination under section 232.116(1)(e) and (h) (2025).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father has unaddressed substance-use and anger-management problems, we affirm the decision of the juvenile court under section 232.116(1)(h). 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie Talkington, Henry W. Latham II, Stuart P. Werling, and Meghan Corbin, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (11 pages)

            A jury found Clifford Gooden III guilty of second-degree burglary.  On appeal, Gooden argues his constitutional right to counsel was violated because the district court allowed him to represent himself at critical stages of the prosecution leading up to trial without first obtaining a valid waiver of his right to counsel.  Gooden also argues the district court should have sua sponte instructed the jury to not consider the fact he voluntarily absented himself from trial when deciding whether he was guilty of the charged offense.  OPINION HOLDS: While Gooden was denied the right to representation at critical stages of the proceedings before he validly waived his right five days before trial started, the denial of his constitutional right did not affect the framework of the proceedings in this case; Gooden is not entitled to a new trial.  And we cannot find the district court committed legal error by not sua sponte giving a jury instruction that is not required by Iowa law.  We affirm Gooden’s conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (18 pages)

            Charley Martin appeals a physical-care and child-support order under Iowa Code chapter 600B (2021).  She challenges the court’s placement of her daughter in the joint physical care of Martin and the daughter’s father, Jacob Callender, arguing that it was based on improper hearsay evidence and does not equitably consider their daughter’s best interest.  And she argues that the court erred in not awarding child support or attorney fees because it failed to consider all Callender’s income and financial resources, including past and future payments from a substantial personal-injury settlement.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review—giving due deference to the district court’s advantage in assessing the parties and witnesses in person and without considering any of the challenged hearsay evidence—we agree with the court’s decision to place their daughter in the parties’ joint physical care.  But Martin is correct that the court failed to properly consider the income Callender will be receiving from his personal-injury settlement and all his available current assets—including those derived from his earlier settlement payments—in ruling on her requests for child support and attorney fees.  And because the record lacks evidence of Callender’s assets and ongoing financial needs, we cannot decide an equitable child-support or attorney-fee award ourselves.  We thus reverse the district court’s denial of Martin’s requests for child support and attorney fees and remand for the court to consider both requests on a fully developed factual record.  Given the inadequate record, we also remand the parties’ requests for appellate attorney fees for the district court to consider their respective financial needs in light of all their available resources.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Paul D. Scott, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (3 pages)

            Bobby Woodberry was convicted of first-degree murder and assault with intent to commit serious bodily injury; he was sentenced to life in prison in 1995.  The district court summarily dismissed Woodberry’s sixth application for postconviction relief, which Woodberry appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: Woodberry did not raise a new ground of law that excepted him from the statute of limitations, and we cannot overrule precedent from the Iowa Supreme Court.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (3 pages)

            After Edward Campbell Jr. filed a frivolous application for postconviction relief, the district court reduced his earned time credit by thirty days as a penalty.  Campbell appeals, arguing that deciding how much to reduce his earned time credit is akin to sentencing and, accordingly, the district court should provide reasons on the record for its specific reduction decision.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court was not required to give reasons for the amount of earned time credit it deducted from Campbell and there is no evidence the district court abused its discretion by imposing a thirty-day reduction, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Rebecca Hergert appeals a district court order appointing one of her brothers, Jason Rottinghaus, as guardian to their father, John Rottinghaus, setting a visitation schedule, and continuing the guardianship.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in selecting Jason from a pool of exclusively imperfect options to serve as guardian—Jason’s years of caregiving and his commitment to John’s desire to receive in-home care tips the balance in his favor.  We similarly find that good cause supports the court’s limited visitation schedule for the six siblings given the recommendations from John’s medical providers, the degree of conflict between the siblings, and John’s desire to see each of his children.  Finally, we agree with the district court that John continues to be best served by a guardianship.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Rustin Davenport, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (20 pages)

            A jury convicted former police officer Michael Tobin Jr. of eleven counts of sexual exploitation of a minor in violation of Iowa Code section 728.12 (2021).  Tobin appeals, arguing that the evidence could not support his nine convictions for promoting or possessing sexually explicit images of minors because he did so in the performance of his official duties.  Short of that, he claims that six of the eight possession violations were not supported by substantial evidence.  The State’s load-bearing evidence was the testimony of C.T., a minor then-Officer Tobin lured into a sexual relationship.  Tobin also raises two evidentiary challenges.  First, he argues that the district court should not have admitted testimony from a twenty-year-old woman about her contemporaneous affair with Tobin under Iowa Rule of Evidence 5.404(b).  Second, he contends that the court misapplied rule 5.412 in excluding C.T.’s testimony that she was bisexual.  Finally, Tobin contests his indeterminate fifteen-year sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no reversible error in the evidentiary rulings.  On the first sufficiency claim, we find Tobin was not conducting official duties when he showed sexually explicit images to C.T.  But the evidence was insufficient to prove he wrongly possessed six of those eight images.  Thus, we vacate his possession convictions on counts four, five, six, seven, ten, and eleven and remand for resentencing on counts one, two, three, eight, and nine.  Given this remedy, we need not address Tobin’s sentencing challenge.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, John Haney, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (14 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for domestic abuse assault, challenging evidentiary rulings, the sufficiency of the evidence, the colloquy for his stipulation to multiple previous domestic-abuse convictions, and the fine and surcharge.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the defendant’s convictions but, accepting the State’s concessions on appeal, remand for additional proceedings on the enhancement and fine issues.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (3 pages)

            More than twenty years after he was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison, Dixon filed this postconviction-relief application—his sixth—which the district court summarily dismissed.  Dixon appeals, arguing a new ground of law excepts him from the statute of limitations and that summary dismissal was inappropriate because the State failed to prove he did not raise a genuine issue of material fact.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the State was entitled to summary dismissal as a matter of law, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of Dixon’s sixth postconviction-relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (3 pages)

            The district court summarily dismissed as time-barred David Willock’s third application for postconviction relief (PCR).  Willock urges us to reconsider our supreme court’s holding that the statute of limitations to PCR actions is constitutional.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Willock’s PCR application.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John Telleen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Telleen, S.J., takes no part.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (3 pages)

               Deven Deschepper appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We concur with the postconviction-relief court’s reasons for denying the claims in Deschepper’s application.  We do not consider two new claims Deschepper raises on appeal, which are not preserved for our review.  We affirm under Iowa Court Rule 21.26(1)(d) and (e).

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

            Connor Gibbs appeals a district court ruling that dismissed his application for postconviction relief as time-barred under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2021).  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Gibbs’s application, finding no nexus between the asserted ground of fact and the challenged conviction. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  Special concurrence by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            Kenneth “Mike” Howard appeals the decree dissolving his twenty-three-year marriage with Anna Howard.  He argues the court erred in its child-support calculation, the spousal-support award is “excessive,” and his premarital assets should have been set aside.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree the district court should have considered the spousal-support award in setting the parties’ respective incomes for purposes of calculating child support, and remand with directions for the court to recalculate accordingly.  We find the rehabilitative spousal support award is fair and equitable.  And Mike failed to preserve error on his claim that the court included premarital assets in property division that should have been excluded.  Finally, we decline Anna’s request for appellate attorney fees.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I reluctantly concur.  But if we were writing on a blank slate, I would find Mike’s failure to attend trial precluded appellate review and summarily affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J. and Ahlers and Badding, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (6 pages)

            An applicant appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) following 2011 convictions for possession with intent to deliver (cocaine), failure to affix a drug tax stamp, disarming a police officer, and interference with official acts.  He claims his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to call a material witness and failing to subpoena a mental-health professional with sufficient time for the mental-health professional to prepare and effectively testify.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant did not establish prejudice, his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims fail.  Accordingly, we affirm.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  Special Concurrence by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            Derrick Moore appeals his conviction for introduction of contraband into a correctional institution.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the substance of Moore’s appeal argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support the conviction, we determine the issue Moore raises on appeal is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.  Substantial evidence supports Moore’s conviction.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I write separately to address the recurring issue of criminal appellants conflating motions for new trial and motions for judgment of acquittal.  If we cannot readily discern what issues are raised, we should deem them waived.  I would not have reached the merits here, though I do not disagree with the majority’s analysis had the issue been properly raised.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Skylar Williams-Rankin appeals the denial of postconviction relief from his convictions for strangling and shooting his girlfriend.  OPINION HOLDS: Because neither of Williams-Rankin’s allegations of ineffective assistance raised on appeal were ruled on below, he has failed to preserve any issue for appellate review. 

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

            An applicant for postconviction relief appeals the denial of his application claiming there were disputed material facts regarding whether counsel was ineffective in developing a record on what he alleges was systematic exclusion of African American jurors in violation of the Iowa Constitution.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Adair County, Stacy Ritchie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Stephen Wilson appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for new trial, arguing the court defied our mandate on remand by reconsidering his motion without further notice or hearing.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no procedural error, we affirm the district court’s order denying Wilson’s motion for new trial.

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

            Ephirem Gurisho entered Alford pleas to two counts of assault with intent to commit sexual abuse and one count of indecent contact with a child.  The district court sentenced him to incarceration for an indeterminate twelve-year term with credit for time served.  Gurisho contends that the court abused its discretion by imposing consecutive sentences of incarceration without stating sufficient reasons.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding adequate reasons in the sentencing colloquy, we affirm.

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

            Todd Adams appeals the dissolution decree ending his marriage with Carol Bower.  He claims his guardian ad litem did not provide adequate representation and the court’s decision awarding the marital residence to Bower was inequitable.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Ida County, Tod Deck, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J. (14 pages)

            Jesus Diaz challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for second-degree murder.  He also challenges a jury instruction permitting jurors to infer malice from his use of a dangerous weapon.  Finally, he contends the district court improperly denied his motions for mistrial.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports Diaz’s conviction for second-degree murder.  Diaz failed to preserve error on his jury-instruction challenge.  As to the challenges to the rulings on his mistrial motions, Diaz failed to preserve error on one.  As to the two preserved challenges, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mistrial motions.  We affirm accordingly.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J. (10 pages)

            Raul Liendo appeals his conviction and sentence for introduction of contraband onto the grounds of a jail, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction, the district court’s failure to engage in an adequate habitual-offender colloquy, and its imposition of a fine.  OPINION HOLDS: Under the unchallenged marshaling instruction in this case, we find that substantial evidence supports Liendo’s conviction because he was “confined” within the ordinary meaning of the word, he knew that he had Fireball whiskey on his person, and the evidence showed the liquid in the bottle was whiskey, an intoxicating beverage.  While we affirm his conviction, we vacate his sentence and remand for further proceedings because the court’s habitual offender colloquy was deficient. 

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

            DeWayne Sanders appeals the decree dissolving his marriage to Tameka Sanders, claiming the court erred in “failing to allow [him] to continue the trial date or submit evidence at or after trial.”  He also claims the court’s property division was inequitable.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that DeWayne’s claim concerning his motion to continue is not preserved for our review, and we reject his other procedural claims.  After our de novo review of the record, we find that while not equal, the district court’s property distribution was equitable given the parties’ short-term marriage and considerable debt. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Heather Lauber, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (11 pages)

            Leonard Boyd appeals the grant of summary judgment to a hospital for medical negligence and negligent hiring, supervision, and retention.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Boyd is unable to generate a genuine issue of material fact that the defendants caused an injury.  So we affirm the grant of summary judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winnebago County, Blake H. Norman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (9 pages)

            Walter Stachar was convicted of sexual abuse in the second degree after a three-day trial by jury.  He appeals, arguing there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for sexually abusing his niece, that the prosecutor made improper statements and vouched for the complaining witness, and that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial based on the weight of the evidence.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports Stachar’s conviction, his claim about the prosecutor’s allegedly improper statements is not preserved, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion for new trial.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (8 pages)

            Amarrion Isom appeals his conviction for murder in the first degree.  He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, arguing the State failed to prove he acted with premeditation.  Isom also appeals the use of a jury instruction permitting an inference of malice from Isom’s use of a dangerous weapon.  OPINION HOLDS: As substantial evidence supported the jury’s finding that Isom acted with premeditation and that the shooting was not an accidental discharge, we find no error in the use of the challenged jury instruction and uphold Isom’s conviction. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Elizabeth Dupuich, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (6 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his convictions for two counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, asserting the district court erred in admitting statements he claims were inadmissible hearsay.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding two of the challenged statements were not hearsay and the third was covered by at least one exception and in any event cumulative and harmless.

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

            A criminal defendant appeals his discretionary sentence, claiming the district court abused its discretion in considering a victim impact statement and providing inadequate reasons for running his misdemeanor sentence consecutively to his two felony sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: Because he didn’t object below when the victim impact statement was read by the prosecutor at the sentencing hearing, that claim is not preserved.  Finding no consideration of any improper factor or abuse of discretion in sentencing, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (21 pages)

            After he required a below-the-knee amputation of his left leg, Jason McKenney brought a lawsuit alleging negligent care against the defendant medical-care providers.  A jury returned a finding of no negligence, which McKenney appeals.  He argues the district court erred in admitting a copy of the referral to the wound clinic both because it was hearsay and because it was “altered” by someone at the medical facility and, thus, constituted fraud on the court.  McKenney also raises a claim of misconduct and misrepresentations made by counsel for the defendants during trial, which he asserts necessitates a new trial.  OPINION HOLDS:  After review, we reject McKenney’s evidentiary challenges and affirm the denial of the motion for new trial.  

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

            LeGear appeals the denial of his fourth PCR petition, claiming the district court erred in granting the State’s motion for summary disposition and his PCR counsel provided ineffective assistance.  OPINION HOLDS:  Because LeGear’s claim does not raise a new issue of fact, his fourth PCR petition is time-barred.  And because his PCR petition was time-barred, LeGear cannot show counsel’s actions were prejudicial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (15 pages)

            A father appeals an order modifying the child support provision of the decree dissolving his marriage, claiming the district court erred in calculating his income.  He also challenges the court’s failure to increase his visitation and the court’s orders relating to the guardian ad litem and the award of trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s modification order and decline an award of appellate attorney fees to either party.

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

            A jury convicted Luke Langebartels of invasion of privacy and five other sexually based offenses.  He now contends that the district court violated his confrontation rights under the Iowa Constitution by allowing the child victim to testify outside of his presence.  He also challenges the sufficiency of the State’s proof for invasion of privacy under Iowa Code section 709.21 (2022).  OPINION HOLDS: Because Langebartels failed to preserve error on his constitutional claim, it is not properly before us.  And viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, we find substantial evidence to satisfy the elements of section 709.21(1).  So, we affirm his convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (10 pages)

            Building tenant Short’s Burger and Shine, LCC (Short’s) appeals from an order and writ of removal and possession in a commercial forcible‑entry‑and‑detainer (FED) action brought by MidWestOne Bank (MWO).  Short’s challenges the effect of a prior FED action and alleged lease violations, whether the lease was modified, and if strict compliance was necessary or equitable.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that MWO never repudiated or violated the clear terms of the lease, the lease wasn’t modified, and equity prohibits relief to Short’s.  We affirm and direct the district court to take any action necessary to issue or enforce the vacated writ of possession.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Following entry of a written guilty plea to criminal mischief and attempted burglary, Terrence Williams appeals the district court’s denial of his request for substitute counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Williams failed to establish good cause, we dismiss his appeal.

            Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kristen Formanek, Judge.  WRIT ANNULLED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Langholz, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (3 pages)

            Joshua Uranga challenges the jurisdiction of the district court to act in his criminal proceeding while his application for discretionary review was pending in the supreme court.  OPINION HOLDS: We treat Uranga’s challenge as a petition for writ of certiorari, grant the writ, and proceed to the merits.  Because an application for discretionary review does not deprive the district court of jurisdiction and Uranga did not seek a stay while the application was pending, the district court had jurisdiction to accept his guilty plea, adjudicate him guilty, and impose a sentence.  We thus annul the writ. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (11 pages)

            Cade Francis Sinclair challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during an investigatory stop of his vehicle.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the officer had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify the investigatory stop of Sinclair’s vehicle, we affirm the denial of Sinclair’s motion to suppress and affirm his conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (4 pages)

            Reed Kahler appeals the district court’s denial of his petition to modify the child custody and physical care provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Megan Paulding.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Reed failed to prove a substantial or material change in circumstances and a criminal no-contact order prevents modifying the custody and physical care provisions, we affirm with this memorandum opinion.  See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d), (e).  We decline Megan’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (18 pages)

            Following the death of her one-year-old son, Yemissi Keto appeals her convictions for first-degree murder and child endangerment resulting in death.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Keto did not make an offer of proof at trial on the evidentiary challenge she now raises, error is not preserved.  Corroborative evidence of Keto’s confession exists in the record to support the guilty verdicts.  And the jury was free to reject Keto’s insanity defense based on the expert testimony presented at trial.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Charles C. Sinnard, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (9 pages)

            Brett Zumbrunnen appeals a ruling modifying the decree dissolving his marriage to Lynnde Zumbrunnen.  He claims the district court erred by failing to grant his request for primary physical care of the parties’ children and by requiring the parties to engage in counseling.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s modification order as modified to eliminate the counseling requirement.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Ian K. Thornhill, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (10 pages)

            A jury convicted Stacy Diveley on six counts of child endangerment.  Stacy appeals, challenging the district court’s denial of her motion for mistrial.  Stacy raises two Brady challenges and one rule 5.403 challenge.  The State disputes Stacy preserved error on these issues.  OPINION HOLDS: Stacy failed to preserve error on her Brady challenges.  Assuming she preserved error on her rule 5.403 challenge, her failure to provide supportive legal authority has waived the issue.  Accordingly, we affirm. 

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

            Defendant-Appellant Gregory Jackson appeals following his jury trial convictions for operating while intoxicated, first offense, a serious misdemeanor in violation of Iowa Code section 321J.2(2)(a) (2023), and possession of a controlled substance, first offense, a serious misdemeanor in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5).  On appeal Jackson claims that the district court failed to apply the proper weight-of-the-evidence standard when ruling upon his motion for new trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Jackson never received a ruling on the weight-of-the-evidence challenge and failed to preserve error, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Jeffrey D. Bert, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (19 pages)

            CMT Highway, LLC (CMT) appeals from a ruling that found it breached its contracts with Logan Contractors Supply, Inc. (Logan Contractors).  CMT argues that it never formed binding contracts with Logan Contractors and, even if it did, it did not breach any contracts when it sought to change the purchase price of materials it was to produce for Logan Contractors.  CMT claims that even if it breached the contracts the court erred in awarding Logan Contractors damages for cover materials and including damages associated with separate projects not subject to the proposed price increases.  Logan Contractors cross-appeals challenging the interest awarded to CMT for previously delivered materials for which Logan Contractors had withheld payment, claiming CMT was improperly awarded double prejudgment interest.  Logan Contractors also argues that the court did not correctly set the start date and rate of post-judgment interest on its award against CMT.  OPINION HOLDS: The parties did form binding contracts when Logan Contractors accepted CMT’s bids, and CMT breached those contracts by refusing to produce materials for Logan Contractors at the agreed pricing.  The award of damages for cover materials is supported by substantial evidence.  Because CMT refused to continue to do any business with Logan Contractors if Logan Contractors did not agree to pay higher prices on certain projects, it repudiated all contracts it had with Logan Contractors and Logan Contractors was entitled to damages for cover materials on all projects, including those not subject to the price increases.  As to the cross-appeal, Logan Contractors failed to preserve error on its claim relating to post-judgment interest.  However, we remand to correct the prejudgment interest awarded to CMT for payments Logan Contractors withheld for previously delivered materials.

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

            A mother appeals from the modification of a custody decree, challenging a finding of a substantial change in circumstances and the father’s ability to provide superior care.  Both parents request appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the modification and decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, Gregg R. Rosenbladt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (11 pages)

            Scott Larson appeals the district court’s ruling on judicial review affirming the Iowa Grain Indemnity Fund Board’s denial of his indemnification claim for soybeans delivered to a licensed grain dealer before the dealer filed for bankruptcy.  OPINION HOLDS: Reviewing the administrative record as a whole, we agree substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that Larson transferred title to the grain outside the six-month indemnity window.  We thus affirm the Board’s denial of his indemnification claim.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fremont County, Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            In this postconviction-relief action, Jacob Beer argues his plea counsel was ineffective for failing to request and secure an interpreter in Dinka, a South Sudan language, and failing to explain the guilty plea to Beer before he signed it.  He claims he did not understand what his guilty plea meant because of the language barrier and maintains he only wanted to go to trial.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Beer failed to show he was prejudiced, so his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims fail.  We affirm.

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

            A defendant appeals from the discretionary sentence and denial of deferred judgment following his guilty plea to domestic abuse assault causing injury.  He claims the district court had a fixed sentencing policy.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (12 pages)

            Linnette Sondgeroth challenges the property-division and attorney-fee provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Robert Sondgeroth.  Her central focus is to regain the inheritance monies she received in 2012 as a part of the property division.  Linnette also argues that the district court abused its discretion when it did not order Robert to pay her trial attorney fees and asks us to order Robert to pay her appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the decree to award Linnette all of her IPERS pension.  The district court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered the parties to pay their own legal fees, and we do not award appellate attorney fees.  We affirm the decree as modified.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Stuart P. Werling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (14 pages)

            A drywall subcontractor tried to foreclose a mechanic’s lien against the general contractor and the owner of a construction project.  But that was impossible because the drywalling was for a public project.  This appeal arises from the subcontractor’s efforts to amend its petition and proceed instead under Iowa Code chapter 573 (2024), which governs public construction projects.  The general contractor and the owner moved to dismiss the amended petition, alleging the subcontractor failed to meet deadlines required by chapter 573.  The district court agreed and dismissed the subcontractor’s petition.  The subcontractor appeals, contending the court should have applied the relation-back doctrine, misinterpreted Iowa Code section 573.10 or, alternatively, overlooked evidence to support an equitable estoppel claim.  The subcontractor also challenges the court’s rulings on its claim of common law fraud and its request for sanctions.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss the amended petition and did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for sanctions, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, David M. Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (6 pages)

            Following a guilty plea, a defendant challenges his sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion by the district court and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, Stephen A. Owen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (5 pages)

            John Wheeler appeals his sentence following his conviction of one count of incest, challenging the district court’s reliance on certain sentencing factors and the disregard of mitigating factors.  Wheeler claims the court abused its discretion by sentencing him to incarceration rather than suspending the sentence as recommended in the presentence investigation report.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.

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

            Markus Neumann appeals the denial of his request to modify physical care, challenging the court’s evidentiary ruling and requesting physical care of the parties’ minor child and a child support variance.  Kelsey Weltz requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Markus cannot establish that modification is warranted, we affirm the denial to modify physical care and remand with directions to award Kelsey appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Roger L. Sailer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (4 pages)

            A father appeals from a finding that his ex-spouse was not in contempt of court for allegedly violating a dissolution decree’s visitation provisions.  OPINION HOLDS: Although it would have been better to address the circumstances surrounding the move first by formal modification, the district court did not err in denying the application for contempt, and we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (11 pages)

            A former spouse appeals provisions from a dissolution decree.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the district court’s decree to terminate the traditional spousal support on July 31, 2034.  We affirm all other aspects of the district court’s dissolution decree.  And we award partial appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Peter B. Newell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the private termination of her parental rights, arguing the child’s grandparents, the child’s current placement, failed to prove a statutory basis for termination and failed to prove termination was in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the grandparents proved the mother abandoned her child and termination is in the child’s best interests.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court. 

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A defendant appeals following his guilty plea to driving while barred as a habitual offender.  OPINION HOLDS: The claim of ineffective-assistance-of-counsel cannot be raised on direct appeal. And finding no abuse of discretion by the district court, we affirm the imposed sentence.

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

            A father appeals the juvenile court order terminating his parental rights to his two minor children.  The father challenges the statutory grounds for termination and argues termination is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the dispositional order in this child-in-need-of-assistance (CINA) proceeding involving his two-year-old son.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to a child born in August 2023.  OPINION HOLDS: After a de novo review of the record, we affirm the order terminating each of their parental rights.

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

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s bridge order transferring jurisdiction over the custody, physical care, and visitation of his child to the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: The father’s position is not adequately formulated to facilitate our review.  We thus affirm the juvenile court’s bridge order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Special Concurrence by Greer, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (f) (2025).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother failed to contest termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e), we affirm on the unchallenged ground.  We also find that termination is in the children’s best interests and decline to apply the permissive exception under section 232.116(3)(b).  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I join the well-written majority; I write separately to express the frustration both the juvenile court and the participants, including the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services, must feel.  In this case, the children were placed three hours or five hours from the mother while the proceedings were pending and best efforts to reunite the family were being made.  It seems to me that the drought of placement options for children works against the reasonable-efforts obligation our legislature requires in trying to reunite endangered families. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court order terminating his parental rights to his son, born in 2023.  He challenges the statutory grounds for termination and contends that the juvenile court should have returned the child to his custody or granted his request for a six-month extension to achieve reunification.  Alternatively, he claims that it would be in the child’s best interests to establish a guardianship rather than terminating parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: After carefully considering the record, we affirm the termination order.

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

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to two children, arguing termination is not in the children’s best interests and that the juvenile court should have transferred guardianship to their grandparents instead.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we find that termination of parental rights, rather than a guardianship, is in the best interests of the children.  We therefore affirm the order of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (8 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal termination of their parental rights to a child.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the child could not have been safely returned to the father’s custody as of trial, termination is in the child’s best interests, and an additional six months for reunification was unnecessary.  Error was not preserved on any exceptions to thwart termination.  We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the statutory grounds for termination have been met, the best interests of the child favor termination, and no extensions or exceptions to termination apply, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to four children. OPINION HOLDS: We find termination of parental rights is in the best interests of the children and decline to apply a permissive exception based on the parent-child bond.  We also conclude that a six-month extension of time was not warranted and that a guardianship with the children’s grandmother was not appropriate at the time of termination.   We therefore affirm the order of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, claiming the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court and termination is not in the children’s best interests because of the bond she shares with the children.  She also claims her due process rights were violated “when the court permitted hearsay evidence to be admitted at the termination trial.”  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination, contends the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification, argues termination is not in the children’s best interests, and requests additional time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject the mother’s reasonable-efforts challenge and find a statutory ground for termination satisfied because the children cannot be safely returned to the mother’s custody.  Termination is in the children’s best interests, and we do not grant the mother any additional time to work toward reunification.  Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals termination of his parental rights to a child born in 2024, challenging the statutory ground, arguing termination is not in the child’s best interests, and seeking additional time to achieve reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the statutory elements were proven and termination is in the child’s best interests, and declining to apply a permissive exception, we affirm.

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a child born in December 2021.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence shows the mother abandoned or deserted the child as required to terminate parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(b) (2025).  Termination is in the child’s best interests.  Finally, section 232.116(1)(b) does not require reasonable efforts.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Erica Crisp, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Parents separately appeal from the termination of their parental rights to two of their children.  Both parents claim the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, termination is not in the children’s best interests due to the bond they share with the parents, and the court should have permitted a six-month extension to termination proceedings.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in 2023, under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), (g), and (h) (2025).  She challenges each of the three steps in our termination analysis and alternatively asks for more time to reunify with the child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother failed to contest termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), we affirm on that unchallenged ground.  We also find that termination is in the child’s best interests, the mother’s permissive-exception argument is not preserved for our review, and an extension of time is unwarranted. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  Both parents claim that the State failed to establish a statutory ground for termination and the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to preclude termination based on their respective bonds with their children.  OPINION HOLDS: As to the father, we conclude that his children could not be returned to his custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying a ground for termination.  We do not apply a permissive exception to preclude termination of his parental rights.  As to the mother, the children could not be safely returned to her custody at the time of the termination hearing, satisfying a statutory ground for termination of her parental rights.  And we do not apply a permissive exception to preclude termination of her parental rights either.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (11 pages)

            The biological parents separately appeal from an order terminating their parental rights.  The father challenges the statutory ground relied on by the district court.  And both parents contend termination is not in the child’s best interests, the district court should have granted additional time for reunification efforts, and their respective bonds with the child should preclude termination.  The mother also challenges the reasonable efforts finding by the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Christine Dalton, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, 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, asking us to apply a permissive exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother failed to preserve error, we affirm the termination of her parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother and father both appeal the termination of their parental rights to their daughter, arguing that the State failed to prove a ground for termination, termination is not in the best interest of the daughter, and that the juvenile court should have granted them additional time to work towards reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the statutory ground for terminating the mother’s and father’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2024) because the daughter could not be returned to either parent’s care at the time of the termination hearing.  And termination of the mother’s and father’s parental rights is in the best interest of the daughter because of the safety concerns that are still present and the parents’ failure to address their mental-health concerns.  What’s more, the daughter is doing well in her current foster care placement and is bonded with her foster mom.  Additional time for reunification is not appropriate here as the daughter deserves permanency now.  We thus affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a seven-year-old son.  She contends the State failed to prove the statutory ground for termination and that the juvenile court erred in denying her motion for active efforts, asserting her child is an Indian child under the Iowa Indian Child Welfare Act.  OPINION HOLDS: We find sufficient proof that returning the child would expose him to adjudicatory harm.  And the record does not show that the child is an Indian child, so we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Kurt J. Stoebe, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Ahlers, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (14 pages)

            Sisters Shelly Zabel and Jacqueline Oberhelman (Jackie) filed competing petitions to be named guardian and conservator of their mother, Mary Zabel, who has advanced dementia.  Following a four-day trial, the district court selected Shelly to be guardian and Green State Credit Union to be the conservator; it suspended a 2012 durable medical power of attorney giving Jackie certain powers.  Jackie appeals, challenging the court’s guardianship decision and the suspension of the power of attorney.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in appointing Shelly guardian rather than Jackie; we affirm that decision.  But the court lacked authority to suspend Mary’s 2012 medical power of attorney naming Jackie as her agent in this circumstance, so we reverse that decision. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            An applicant convicted of first-degree murder and first-degree burglary appeals the denial of his application for DNA profiling under Iowa Code section 81.10 (2022).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the applicant filed his application for DNA profiling as a standalone case and the district court did not take judicial notice of his underlying criminal case or his pending postconviction-relief proceeding, the records in those other cases are not before us.  On the merits, the district court properly denied his application because all requested samples were already profiled and the applicant failed to allege any new method or technology for retesting the samples.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott J. Beattie, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Langholz, P.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (4 pages) 

            Ceeron Williams appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) from his convictions for assault with the intent to inflict serious injury, intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent, and willful injury causing serious injury.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the PCR court that Williams failed to establish that his trial counsel breached an essential duty and failed to show prejudice resulted from any of the claimed breaches.  Because we cannot provide any better reasoning or analysis than that found in the PCR court’s well-reasoned order, we affirm with this memorandum opinion.  See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d), (e).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Christopher C. Foy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Moises Erreguin-Labra appeals his convictions for third-degree sexual abuse and assault causing bodily injury, arguing the district court’s response to a report of unauthorized courtroom photography biased his jury and denied his right to a fair trial.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Erreguin-Labra raised no objection to the court’s actions at trial, his sole challenge on appeal is not preserved for our review.  We affirm his convictions without reaching the merits of his jury bias claim.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher, Badding, Buller, and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Special concurrence by Tabor, C.J.  (22 pages)

            Will Young Jr. appeals his convictions and sentences for willful injury causing serious injury and intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent.  He asserts that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, urging this court to reach that claim by finding Iowa Code section 814.7 (2023) unconstitutional.  Young also contends that the State failed to prove the “reasonable apprehension” element of his intimidation charge, and that the district court was unaware it had discretion to reduce his minimum sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: We reject Young’s argument that Iowa Code section 814.7 violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.  We therefore lack authority to decide his ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal.  We further conclude that Young’s conviction for intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent, as marshaled at trial, is supported by sufficient evidence.  We find no evidence of a lapse in the district court’s sentence discretion.  Accordingly, we affirm.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: The majority properly finds Young’s interest in vindicating his Sixth Amendment right can be diverted to postconviction proceedings without violating the Supremacy Clause.  But in my view, he makes a powerful case that “the Iowa legislature’s determination that most ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims are better resolved in collateral proceedings cannot countermand the Sixth Amendment’s requirement that states provide indigent defendants with effective representation.”  I write separately to underscore that serious doubt remains whether vindication in postconviction relief proceedings—on a practical level—will come quickly enough to deliver justice.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Alan Heavens, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            Jerris Davis Sr. appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, which alleged that (1) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move for a mistrial and to poll the jury because of a heated argument between two jurors during deliberations; and (2) appellate counsel was ineffective for failing “to raise issues other than ineffective assistance of counsel.”  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we agree with the district court that Davis failed to prove that his trial counsel and previous appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joseph D. Seidlin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (3 pages)

            Michael Roach was convicted of second-degree murder and first-degree robbery in 2004.  The district court summarily dismissed his sixth postconviction-relief application, filed more than thirteen years after the statute of limitations closed.  Roach appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: Roach did not raise a new ground of law that excepted him from the statute of limitations, we cannot overrule precedent from the Iowa Supreme Court, and Roach’s equitable tolling claim is not preserved.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tamra Roberts, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (12 pages)

            After a bench trial led to convictions for one count of second-degree sexual abuse and one count of third-degree sexual abuse, Searcy Wyatt sought postconviction relief (PCR).  Wyatt asserted trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to (1) call additional witnesses on his behalf, (2) use exhibits he provided, and (3) adequately prepare him to testify at trial.  The district court denied Wyatt’s application.  On appeal, Wyatt asks us to reverse the district court’s ruling on the same claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Wyatt failed to establish that counsel breached an essential duty in any of the three claims he raised, so we need not consider the alleged cumulative prejudice he suffered.  We affirm the district court’s denial of his PCR application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Zachary Verdeyen appeals his convictions of second-degree sexual abuse and lascivious acts with a child.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that Verdeyen is guilty of both charges, so we affirm his convictions.

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

            Brianna Moss pleaded guilty to criminal mischief in the second degree and possession of a controlled substance.  The district court sentenced her to concurrent prison terms of five years and 365 days.  Moss raises two issues in this appeal of her sentence.  First, she contends that the court improperly relied on unproven conduct—her failures to appear for sentencing and to maintain contact with her probation officer.  Second, she alleges that the court abused its discretion by choosing prison over probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding that the district court neither considered impermissible factors nor abused its discretion by imposing incarceration, we affirm Moss’s sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Shelby County, Amy Zacharias, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (7 pages)

            Scott Rasmussen appeals, and Michelle Rasmussen cross-appeals, the property division in the decree dissolving their marriage.  They each challenge the amount of the cash equalization payment.  Scott argues the payment is too high because Michelle dissipated marital assets, while Michelle argues the payment is too low because of an excluded asset and errors in the court’s calculations.  Scott also challenges the court’s decision to award an empty lot at Lake Panorama to Michelle.    OPINION HOLDS: We decline to apply the dissipation doctrine to Michelle’s spending that occurred during the marriage, but we do subtract funds she used to pay off a marital debt from her liquidated 401(k) funds.  We affirm the district court’s division of assets, with the addition of assigning Scott’s service truck to him in the amount of $30,000.  Following our recalculation of the property award, we raise Scott’s equalization payment by $33,000.  Lastly, we decline Michelle’s request for appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (12 pages)

            Lee Anne McColl appeals the economic provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Jeffrey Howe.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the provisions of the decree dividing the parties’ assets to require that Jeffey pay Lee Anne an additional $6500 but affirm in all other respects.  We decline to award Lee Anne appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (13 pages)

            A spouse appeals the division of property in the decree dissolving her marriage with her husband.  She also makes claims for trial attorney and expert witness fees, as well as requesting appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the increase of net value of an LLC formed during the marriage with the spouses as members should have been considered a divisible marital asset and modify the decree accordingly.  We otherwise affirm the district court’s decree and deny the wife’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (5 pages)

            Chloe Clark appeals the denial of postconviction relief from her simple-misdemeanor conviction for fifth-degree criminal mischief.  She argues that she received ineffective assistance of counsel because her counsel failed to ensure her plea was knowing and voluntary as she thought she was pleading guilty to littering.  OPINION HOLDS: Even assuming counsel breached an essential duty, Clark failed to prove prejudice.  There is no reasonable probability that Clark would not have pleaded guilty to this simple misdemeanor offense given the favorable plea agreement that resulted in the dismissal of two felony offenses.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES AFFIRMED IN PART AND VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF CORRECTED JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J. (7 pages)

            Bryant Wallace appeals his conviction and sentence, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent (Count I).  He also asserts the district court erred by imposing an uncharged sentencing enhancement and by failing to merge his conviction for conspiracy (Count III) with his conviction under Count I.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict on Count I, and so we affirm Wallace’s conviction for intimidation with a dangerous weapon with intent.  As for the sentencing claims, we reject Wallace’s challenge to the mandatory minimum but vacate his conviction under Count III.  We remand this case for entry of a corrected judgment and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Iowa County, Justin Lightfoot, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (9 pages)

            Van Otegham Dairy Partnership (VODP) appeals from the district court’s ruling granting Spahn & Rose Lumber Company’s (S&R) motion for summary judgment, arguing the district court erred (1) “in concluding that boilerplate fine print disclaiming responsibility for materials selection nullified S&R’s” (a) “express warranty to complete a workmanlike barn” and (b) “express agreement to design and build a dairy barn of good quality” and (2) “because [the district court’s] interpretation of the materials disclaimer violated the doctrine of expectations.”  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment as to counts one and four of VODP’s amended petition, and remand for further proceedings.  Because we can decide this appeal on VODP’s primary arguments, we need not address whether the contract was a contract of adhesion subject to the doctrine of reasonable expectations. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Casey D. Jones (plea) and Nicholas Scott (sentencing), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Doyen appeals his guilty plea, arguing that because he never signed his written guilty plea, the court cannot show he voluntarily and intelligently agreed to its terms, including waiving his right to file a motion in arrest of judgment, which our appellate courts have found to be a prerequisite to finding good cause to challenge the terms of his guilty plea on appeal.  OPINION HOLDS: We find Doyen had good cause to challenge his appeal.  But the record is devoid of information on whether the guilty plea was entered voluntarily and intelligently or if Doyen would have chosen to go to trial absent a defect in the guilty plea.  We affirm Doyen’s conviction and sentence; he may seek relief through a postconviction-relief action if he chooses.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Winneshiek County, Laura J. Parrish, Judge.  WRIT SUSTAINED IN PART, WRIT ANNULLED IN PART, AND CASE REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (9 pages)

            Roger Lundtvedt contests the legality of the district court’s orders issued in a contempt action.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court exceeded the law by requiring Lundtvedt to pay attorney fees to purge his contempt, we sustain the writ of certiorari as to that part of the contempt order but annul the writ in all other particulars.  We remand to the district court for entry of an order consistent with this decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, James N. Daane, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  Dissent by Buller, J.  (19 pages)

            Dawn Cook appeals from a ruling that granted Scott Flieder’s petition to modify the parties’ dissolution decree to grant him physical care of the parties’ two children.  After moving out of state in 2018 and leaving the children in her mother’s care since then, Dawn claims that her “heavy reliance upon her mother to assist in raising the children does not make Scott a superior parent,” considering Scott’s failure to pay her any child support and his sporadic visitation with the children.  OPINION HOLDS: In this close case, we give careful consideration to the district court’s findings that Dawn previously denied Scott access to the children, Scott has recently become much more active in the children’s lives, and the children’s best interests are served by allowing them to remain in a familiar environment in their father’s care.  We affirm the district court’s decision granting Scott physical care.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because the father is an unemployed convicted sex offender and admitted domestic abuser, has limited to no experience meaningfully parenting the children on his own, and has never paid a dime of child support, I dissent from the majority's finding that he is a superior caretaker compared to the mother, who prioritized her career to financially support the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Blake H. Norman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A party to a real estate agreement appeals a ruling finding the agreement was not unconscionable, declaring the other party is the legal owner, and issuing a writ of possession to the other party.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals from a custody decree placing physical care of her two children with their father.  She argues the district court misweighed the relevant custodial factors and requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: After considering the district court’s implicit and explicit credibility findings, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  S.J. Telleen takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (3 pages)

            Debra Miller appeals the sentence imposed following her pleas of guilty to theft and assault while displaying a dangerous weapon.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of the court’s discretion in imposing a prison sentence, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wright County, Hans Becker, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (3 pages)

            A petitioner, M.Z., appeals the juvenile court’s dismissal of her petition to establish an involuntary guardianship over two minor children.  M.Z. argues the juvenile court’s dismissal was predicated on an incorrect interpretation of Iowa Code section 232D.301(1) (2024).  OPINION HOLDS: Because M.Z. failed to serve the minors and minors’ known parents pursuant to Iowa Code Section 232D.302 and Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.702, our court lacks jurisdiction, and we accordingly dismiss this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (22 pages)

            Nicole Shimp f/k/a Happel appeals the district court order modifying the visitation provisions of she and Brian Happel’s dissolution decree.  Nicole claims the district court erred by not granting her request for primary physical care of her and Brian’s three sons.  Alternatively, she argues the district court erred by altering the summer visitation schedule to eliminate her Wednesday overnight visitation with the children. Brian cross-appeals, claiming the district court erred by (1) denying his request for a week-on/week-off summer visitation schedule; (2) awarding Nicole $20,000 in trial attorney fees; and (3) incorrectly determining his gross income for child support purposes.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review of the record, we affirm on appeal and cross-appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Van Buren County, John M. Wright, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Langholz, P.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (7 pages)

Travis Gonterman appeals his sentence following his guilty plea for driving while barred as a habitual offender.  On appeal, Gonterman contends the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him by not providing any reasons on the record for his sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Gonterman has failed to establish good cause, we lack jurisdiction to entertain his appeal.  Consequently, we dismiss this appeal.         

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Joshua P. Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (4 pages)

            T.C. appeals the district court’s order continuing his residential treatment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is substantial evidence supporting the court’s findings, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, John R. Flynn, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (6 pages)

            Ruslan Negruta appeals his conviction and sentence for ongoing criminal conduct.  He argues that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary and that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to prison rather than probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Negruta did not file a motion in arrest of judgment after being properly advised of the need to do so to challenge his guilty plea on appeal, we cannot consider the challenge to his plea.  And seeing no abuse of discretion, we affirm the district court’s sentencing decision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (16 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  Both challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination and claim the State failed to prove the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services made active efforts to reunify them with their child.  The mother also claims termination is not in the child’s best interests due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.  And the father claims the court should have placed the child in a guardianship with a maternal aunt in lieu of terminating parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: In light of the mother’s ongoing substance use and her continued contact with the child’s abusive father, we affirm termination of the mother’s parental rights and find her requested alternatives to termination are not warranted. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two of her children, H.S., born in 2021, and R.B., born in 2023.  She argues the juvenile court should have granted a six month extension of the termination proceedings to allow her additional time to reunify with her children.  OPINION HOLDS: After our de novo review, we affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Sandy, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (6 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s and father’s parental rights to C.H. and M.H. pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (h) (2024), respectively.  The parents separately appeal, but both argue giving them additional time to work toward reunification or, alternatively, establishing a guardianship is in the children’s best interests rather than termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We cannot say an additional six months will remedy the issues preventing reunification, so we agree with the juvenile court that additional time is not warranted.  And because there is not a viable option for guardian and a guardianship is not in the children’s best interests, we affirm the termination of the mother’s and the father’s parental rights.     

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph L. Tofilon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (6 pages)

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to F.C., born in 2024, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2024).  The mother challenges termination, arguing (1) it was improper for the juvenile court to hold a combined permanency and termination-of-parental-rights hearing, (2) the State failed to prove the statutory ground for termination because F.C. could have been returned to her custody, and (3) the court should have given her additional time to work toward reunification.  In the alternative, the mother asks for the court to establish a guardianship in lieu of termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART ON APPEAL; REVERSED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A father appeals and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services cross-appeals the juvenile court’s dispositional review order.  Both challenge the juvenile court’s denial of their requests for supervised visitation in a therapeutic setting.  And the father challenges the order for a new psychosexual evaluation, contending that the court erroneously denied his request that it be completed by a different evaluator than the first evaluation.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the visitation restriction.  Given the father’s progress over the past year, and with the safeguards of full supervision and a therapeutic setting, we believe the daughter can be adequately protected while allowing the case to proceed.  Because the court’s order does not prohibit a new evaluator for the father’s second psychosexual evaluation, and the Department agrees that a new evaluator is appropriate, we affirm the court’s order authorizing the evaluation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (10 pages)

            David Moffitt appeals the denial of postconviction relief, arguing his criminal defense counsel should have pursued diminished-responsibility and intoxication defenses during his trial on first-degree murder and first-degree robbery charges.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Moffitt failed to develop or obtain a ruling on his intoxication argument below, error is not preserved on that issue.  As for diminished responsibility, counsel did not breach any essential duty in forgoing the defense, as counsel reasonably concluded that the evidence at trial could not support the defense.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Connie Spencer appeals the decree dissolving her eleven-year, later-in-life marriage with David Christiansen.  She argues that the property division is inequitable and that the court should have awarded her traditional spousal support mainly because of her Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis during the marriage.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with Spencer in one respect—she should have been credited for the significant improvements made during the marriage to the home awarded to Christiansen.  So we modify the decree to increase Christiansen’s equalization payment to Spencer by $24,000 to account for her contributions toward improving that home.  But on the remaining issues, we affirm the district court’s decree.  We find it equitable for Christiansen to retain the proceeds of selling his business very early in the marriage, the retirement and investment accounts were fairly divided, and Spencer failed to preserve error on any excess funds set aside for income taxes.  As for spousal support, Spencer leaves the marriage with significant assets and income and has not shown that this is the exceptional case justifying traditional spousal support so far outside the general twenty-year durational threshold.  Finally, we decline Christiansen’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (4 pages)

            Imere Hall appeals the dismissal of his fourth application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Hall filed his application outside the statute of limitations contained in Iowa Code section 822.3 (2022) and does not raise a ground of law or fact that could not have been raised within the statute of limitations, we affirm the dismissal of his application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clarke County, Thomas P. Murphy, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers, Badding, Chicchelly, and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (9 pages)

            Vernon Walker appeals his convictions for operating while intoxicated and possession of marijuana.  He argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support the jury’s guilty verdict on either count.  OPINION HOLDS: The State presented substantial evidence to support the jury’s findings of guilt on both charges.  Accordingly, we affirm.

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

    The defendant appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to operating while intoxicated, arguing the sentencing court abused its discretion because the presentence investigation reporter held a fixed policy for its sentencing recommendation, the court “fixated” on his prior vehicle accidents, and the court should have ordered probation rather than incarceration.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the court’s reasoning and sentence, so we affirm.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Chickasaw County, Richard Stochl (unjust-enrichment counterclaims) and John J. Sullivan (quiet-title action), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (14 pages)

            Michael and Bonnie Mulhern, executors of the estate of Cecelia Schimmel, appeal the district court’s grants of summary judgment (1) dismissing their quiet-title action under Iowa’s marketable-record-title statute for farmland that Schimmel originally inherited under the Kruger will and (2) ordering them to pay a portion of the crop-share rents received after Schimmel’s death on the Kruger-will remainder beneficiaries’ counterclaims for unjust enrichment.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court properly granted summary judgment on the estate’s quiet-title claim.  Schimmel inherited only a life estate under the Kruger will.  And the clerk’s certificate of change of title—which did not note that Schimmel’s interest was only a life estate—is not “a conveyance or other title transaction” under the marketable-record-title statute.  So the remainder beneficiaries’ interest in the farmland is not extinguished by that statute.  And because the estate did not preserve its challenges to the court’s method of apportioning the rents between the estate and the remainder beneficiaries for the year Schimmel died, we cannot consider the merits of that ruling on the beneficiaries’ unjust-enrichment counterclaim.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (13 pages)

            Brad and Nancy Worrell appeal the district court’s judgment granting in part and denying in part their claim of adverse possession against Lake Crest Manor Home Owners Association.  They argue that the court erred in refusing to find their claim established for an additional parcel of land because their use of the additional land was “factually the same” as the smaller parcel of land for which the court found they established adverse possession.  OPINION HOLDS: Lake Crest Manor Home Owners Association does not cross-appeal.  So whether the Worrells proved all the requirements for adverse possession for that smaller parcel is not before us.  And we agree with the district court that the Worrells did not prove adverse possession for the additional parcel because the record lacks clear and positive proof that they had a good-faith claim of right to the land or that their use rose to the level of hostile, actual, open, exclusive, and continuous possession for ten years.  We thus affirm the district court’s judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Iowa County, Andrew B. Chappell, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Jessica Dayton appeals the denial of her application for postconviction relief from her conviction of first-degree murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Dayton’s due process claim is barred by Iowa Code § 822.8.  But even if we were to set section 822.8 aside, Dayton was not denied due process when the State presented minor discrepancies in its theory of the case at two other trials.  With respect to her other claims, Dayton fell short of proving her trial counsel was ineffective.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Justin Lightfoot, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (11 pages)

            Brandon Nelson appeals following his thirteen criminal convictions related to a high-speed chase and firearm altercation with law enforcement.  On appeal, Nelson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting four of his convictions: (1) assault on a peace officer while using or displaying a dangerous weapon; (2) interference with official acts while armed with a firearm; (3) going armed with intent; and (4) attempted murder of a peace officer.  He also contends that the district court abused its discretion during sentencing by failing to consider his expressions of remorse.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports Nelson’s convictions on all challenged counts.  The district court properly considered Nelson’s expressions of remorse and did not abuse its discretion in sentencing. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Badding, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Doyle, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Tajh Ross appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Ross cannot show a reasonable probability that he would have received a new trial if counsel had timely applied for further review after this court affirmed the denial of his first application for postconviction relief, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (26 pages)

            Dianne Christopher appeals a summary judgment ruling in favor of the defendants on her claims alleging defamation and invasion of privacy.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Michael Carpenter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (3 pages)

            Venhure Yosef Tsegay appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the PCR court thoroughly addressed the issue in its ruling, we affirm by memorandum opinion.  See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, Kevin McKeever, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (18 pages)

            Two defendants appeal an adverse jury verdict in a coemployee gross negligence action arising from Michael Griffith’s death at work, claiming they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, that the district court erred in the gross negligence jury instructions given, and allege evidentiary issues in admitting administrative citations and certain testimony.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding substantial evidence existed on the gross‑negligence claim for a reasonable jury to find the defendants liable, they are not entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and the court did not err submitting the questions to the jury.  We find no legal errors in the jury instructions, determine any error in references to evidence underlying the citations was harmless, and the testimony of a treatment provider and a therapist was proper.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (11 pages)

            David Jacobs appeals an order modifying the legal-custody and physical-care provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Temeshia Bomato.  He claims the district court erred in granting Temeshia’s request for sole legal custody and physical care of the parties’ child.  He also challenges the district court’s denial of his request to modify the summer-visitation provisions of the parties’ original decree.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s modification order.  We decline to award appellate attorney fees. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David P. Odekirk, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (11 pages)

            Trashon Montgomery appeals his convictions for first-degree burglary and willful injury causing serious injury, challenging the trial court’s admission of prior-bad-acts evidence and the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict on both counts.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the admission of testimony regarding Montgomery’s prior assaults on the victim, and we find sufficient evidence to convict Montgomery on each of the elements he challenges on appeal.  We therefore affirm his convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Christopher C. Polking, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  Dissent by Langholz, J.  (22 pages)

            An applicant appeals the district court’s summary dismissal of his first application for postconviction relief, arguing that his postconviction-relief counsel was ineffective.  OPINION HOLDS: Limiting our review to the claim actually briefed, and finding Uranga did not prove counsel was ineffective, we affirm. DISSENT ASSERTS:  If Iowa’s statutory right to counsel in postconviction-relief proceedings still guarantees that court-appointed counsel will assist—rather than abandon—their clients, that right was violated here. The majority’s contrary conclusion runs afoul of governing precedent and the underlying principles of fundamental fairness.  Because abandoning Uranga without a voice in the court’s summary disposition of his claims could never be an ethical strategy, we do not need any more evidence to find that Uranga’s counsel breached an essential duty.  Since this conduct left Uranga constructively without counsel at a crucial stage of the postconviction-relief proceeding and thus rendered the entire proceeding presumptively unreliable, Uranga is entitled to reversal without proving any further prejudice.  And Uranga presents this ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim in his briefing to us—so we should not avoid following the governing law based on a hyper-technical reading of his arguments.  I would thus reverse and remand for further proceedings with the effective assistance of counsel to which Uranga is entitled.

            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.  (16 pages)

            Ryan Waller appeals the district court’s decree dissolving his marriage to Sasha Kill.  Ryan challenges the district court’s determinations regarding physical care of their children, income for child and spousal support purposes, and the amount and duration of spousal support.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly determined that placing the children in Sasha’s physical care is in the best interests of the children.  The decree equitably determined Ryan’s income, as well as the amount and duration of spousal support awarded to Sasha.  We decline to address Ryan’s arguments that were not properly preserved for appeal and deny Sasha’s request for appellate attorney fees.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk 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.  (7 pages)

    William Riley appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, claiming the court “erred by not recusing itself from this case”; his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to adequately advise him “as to the benefits of a jury trial over a bench trial”; and he is actually innocent.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 
 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Korie L. Talkington, Judge.  SENTENCE AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF A CORRECTED SENTENCING ORDER.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (9 pages)

    Bradley Osborn appeals his sentence for two counts of aggravated misdemeanor assault, alleging that the district court considered only the nature of the offenses when denying his request for deferred judgment and impermissibly relied only on the existence of two victims in imposing consecutive terms. Osborn also argues that the court’s designation of the county jail as the place of confinement was illegal.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm Osborn’s consecutive sentences.  We remand solely for the district court to commit Osborn to the custody of the director of the Iowa Department of Corrections.
 

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

            John Anderson, a former university student, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his previously adjudicated discrimination claims.  OPINION HOLDS: We summarily affirm the district court’s order dismissing Anderson’s petition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Steven Andreasen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (4 pages)

            Juan Ledesma appeals the district court’s order dismissing his fifth application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Ledesma failed to preserve his challenge to the constitutionality of Iowa Code section 822.3 (2023), we affirm the dismissal of his application as untimely.  We also agree with the district court that Ledesma failed to assert any substantive claim for postconviction relief. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, S.J.  (8 pages)

    Christopher Prichard appeals his conviction of first-degree murder of his estranged wife, challenging the district court’s decision to allow evidence of her fear of him and the temporary no-contact order between them.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (3 pages)

            A postconviction relief applicant appeals the dismissal of his application.  OPINION HOLDS: Because this sixth application was filed years after the statute of limitations had run and none of the claims fall within an exception to the statute of limitations, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (21 pages)

            Tevontaye Elliott appeals his convictions and sentences following a jury trial on third-degree sexual abuse, indecent exposure, and sexual exploitation of a minor.  Elliott challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on his sexual-abuse and indecent-exposure convictions, and he disputes the district court’s admission of a Cellebrite extraction report into evidence.  He also alleges the district court erred in sentencing him to prison and ordering the sentences to run consecutive to a separate sentence he received for contempt.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Elliott’s admissions to committing sex acts with M.R. were corroborated by other evidence and the indecent-exposure victim’s testimony could lead a reasonable jury to conclude she was offended, sufficient evidence existed to support the jury’s guilty verdicts.  Because the district court reasonably interpreted its own prior discovery order, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the Cellebrite extraction report into evidence.  And because the district court did not abuse its discretion at sentencing, we uphold the sentences imposed by the district court.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  Dissent by Sandy, J.  (25 pages)

            Denise Farley appeals the denial of her motion for a new trial, arguing the district court abused its discretion in barring her expert’s testimony.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the expert’s specialized knowledge, if admitted, would not help the jury understand the evidence or decide a fact in issue, we find the court did not abuse its discretion in excluding Farley’s expert testimony.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Because liability was determined without the benefit of the expert’s’s timely disclosed and relevant testimony on the Schultzes’ negligence and liability, and because such was critical to Farley’s case and thus prejudiced her, I respectfully dissent.

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Christopher Kemp, Judge.  REVERSED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (19 pages)

    Donald Tuttle sustained two work-related injuries during his employment at Archer Daniels Midland (ADM): a left knee injury and a head injury.  The deputy workers’ compensation commissioner granted Tuttle’s requests for alternate medical care for both claims.  On judicial review, the district court affirmed the deputy’s grant of alternate medical care for Tuttle’s head injury but remanded the claim involving care for his knee to the deputy for a more specific finding.  ADM appeals that judicial review order, advancing three arguments concerning care for Tuttle’s head injury: (1) the court erred in finding ADM unreasonably delayed treatment; (2) the court exceeded its jurisdiction and authority by making new factual findings not considered or relied upon by the deputy; and (3) even if the alleged treatment delay is actionable, the court erred in finding it was unreasonable under Iowa Code section 85.27(4) (2023).  As for the knee injury, ADM argues the court erred in ordering a remand because there was insufficient evidence to conclude its authorized treatment was unreasonable.  Tuttle cross-appeals, contending the remand was unnecessary because the agency applied the correct standard in making its factual findings.  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s order affirming the head-injury portion of the deputy’s alternate care decision.  We also reverse the court’s remand and affirm the deputy’s decision granting alternate care for Tuttle’s knee injury.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Porter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Langholz, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            Former Iowa Board of Parole member Kathleen Kooiker appeals the dismissal of her claims of wrongful discharge and intentional interference with prospective business advantage under Iowa Code chapter 70A (2023).  OPINION HOLDS: As Kooiker’s status as an officer rather than an employee preempts her from asserting claims under section 70A.28, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, Amy M. Moore, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (9 pages)

            A father appeals from a custodial decree granting both parents legal custody and placing their child in the mother’s physical care.  The father challenges the award of joint legal custody and the physical-care determination.  The father also requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that awarding the parents joint legal custody is in the child’s best interests.  However, we conclude that the child’s interests are best served by placing the child in the father’s physical care.  We remand to the district court to determine the mother’s visitation schedule, child-support obligation, obligations for medical support, and tax dependency exemptions.  We do not award the father any appellate attorney fees.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark (motions) and Jeffrey Farrell (trial), Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (10 pages)

            Following a jury trial, Darren Diggs appeals his conviction for first-degree murder.  He challenges the admission of evidence under the inevitable discovery rule.  He argues the district court erred in determining the inevitable discovery rule does not violate article I, section 8 of the Iowa constitution.  The State rejects Diggs’s constitutional challenge and counters that even if the inevitable discovery rule is unconstitutional, the admission of the disputed evidence was harmless.  OPINION HOLDS: As the record contains overwhelming evidence of guilt beyond the disputed evidence, any alleged error was harmless.  Accordingly, we affirm.

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

            Douglas Dally appeals the judgment entered on his negligence claim against Randy Demro.  OPINION HOLDS: I. The district court did not err in admitting Dally’s mental health records into evidence because they were relevant and the probative value was not outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.  II. Because the jury’s damage award is not inconsistent, we affirm the denial of Dally’s motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Meghan Corbin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Buller, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A defendant appeals the district court’s denial of his motion in arrest of judgment and his prison sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: The district court correctly denied Vivas’s untimely motion in arrest of judgment.  Additionally, we find no abuse of the court’s discretion in imposing a prison sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (12 pages)

            A state employee appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for judicial review.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Stanfield’s petition for judicial review.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O'Brien County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge.  SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchellly, J.  (4 pages)

            Sheila Marie Sundall appeals the sentence imposed after pleading guilty to possession of a controlled substance, third or subsequent offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the sentencing court considered an unproven offense when sentencing Sundall, we vacate and remand for resentencing before a different judge consistent with this opinion.

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

            Rodney Henricksen appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to (1) call his lip-reading expert to testify at trial, (2) adequately prepare Henricksen and another witness for their testimony, (3) adequately communicate regarding his case and trial strategies, such as a justification defense, and (4) seek a mistrial based on Henricksen’s jail phone calls.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we cannot provide any better reasoning or analysis than that found in the district court’s thorough and well-reasoned order, we affirm with this memorandum opinion.

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

    Cedric Taylor appeals his sentence for sexual abuse in the third degree, contending that the State breached the plea agreement and that the district court abused its discretion in imposing a term of incarceration by considering an unproven offense.  OPINION HOLDS: On the first contention, because the plea agreement allowed the State to advocate for any sentence provided by law, the prosecutor’s comments did not breach that agreement.  On the second claim, the sentencing court’s colloquial references to the victim as a child did not betray an intent to sentence Taylor for an uncharged offense.  We thus affirm the judgment and sentence.
 

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

            Following his guilty plea to an aggravated misdemeanor, Cedric Taylor appeals the district court’s imposition of a sentence that conforms with the plea agreement.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Taylor did not establish good cause, we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, David Nelmark, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Smith appeals his guilty plea, arguing he was not adequately informed of the consequences of pleading to the lesser-included charge of attempted murder.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Smith did not raise his argument on appeal in his motion in arrest of judgment, his only claim of error was not preserved, so he does not have good cause to appeal.  We dismiss his appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (10 pages)

            Nathan Gunson appeals the district court’s denial of his petition to modify the decree dissolving his marriage with Heather Gunson.  He argues the district court erred in (1) failing to sever shared physical care and award Nathan physical care, (2) failing to set child support and uncovered medical costs in accordance with Nathan’s physical care status, (3) awarding Heather trial attorney fees, and (4) failing to award Nathan trial attorney fees.  Nathan also requests appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We find that Heather’s move caused a material and substantial change in circumstances.  We accordingly reverse the district court’s denial of Nathan’s petition, modify the custody order to award him physical care of the children, and remand to the district court for determination of a visitation schedule, recalculation of child support and uncovered medical costs, and entry of an order consistent with this opinion.  We reverse the district court’s award of trial attorney fees to Heather and award Nathan $5000 in appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph L. Tofilon, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, P.J.  (13 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing the juvenile court impinged on his due process rights, erred in finding a statutory basis for termination, erred in finding termination was in the child’s best interests, failed to apply an exception to termination, and failed to provide reasonable efforts to the father to aid in reunification.  Alternatively, the father asks for guardianship or extension of termination proceedings.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State’s failure to formally serve the father with notice of the child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding does not require a reversal of the order terminating his parental rights.  Substantively, the court did not err in finding a statutory basis for termination, termination is in the best interests of the child, no permissive exception to termination applies, and any extension of proceedings or implementation of a guardianship is not in the best interest of the child. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, Hans Becker, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination because the child could not be returned to the mother’s custody.  We find that termination is in the child’s best interests and decline to grant the mother additional time to work toward reunification. 

    Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, Joan M. Black, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, C.J.  (10 pages)

    A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a thirteen-year-old daughter.  She argues the State failed to make reasonable efforts toward their reunification, contests the ground for termination, contends termination was not in the child’s best interests, and argues the court should have given her additional time.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother was offered appropriate services and did not choose to engage until the eve of termination, we reject her reasonable-efforts claim.  We also find that the State offered clear and convincing evidence that the child could not be safely returned to her mother’s care.  In fact, at the termination hearing, the mother only asked for more time to work toward reunification with her daughter.  As for more time, we agree with the district court that deferring permanency was not in the child’s best interests.  Thus, we affirm the termination order.
 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Buller, J.  (5 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a child, challenging the statutory elements and requesting additional time.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (12 pages)

            A mother and father each appeal the termination of their parental rights to their daughter.  The mother argues that termination of her rights is not in the daughter’s best interest and that a guardianship should have been established instead.  The father argues that termination of his rights is not in the daughter’s best interest, that the court should have exercised its discretion to decline termination under the parent–child bond exception and the relative-custody exception, and that a guardianship should have been established instead.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the daughter’s best interest given the mother’s failure to address the safety concerns she poses to the daughter, and a guardianship is not appropriate given the daughter’s age and the family interactions.  As for the father’s appeal, we also agree that it is in the daughter’s best interest for his rights to be terminated rather than establishing a guardianship as she deserves permanency now.  Any parent-child bond does not warrant declining to terminate the father’s parental rights, and the relative-custody exception does not apply because the daughter is not in the legal custody of a relative.  We thus affirm on both appeals. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (4 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because termination is in the best interests of the child, we affirm termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two sons, and the older son also appeals termination of the mother’s rights to him.  OPINION HOLDS: The son’s objection to termination is grounded in his wish to care for the mother and be with her to ensure she is supported going forward.  But at twelve years old, he deserves to be a kid.  And one of our core responsibilities is to ensure children are cared for, not doing the caretaking.  So, like the juvenile court, we find the child-objection exception should not prevent termination here.  As for the other issues, the mother’s lack of progress with her substance use precludes returning the sons to her custody, the sons are best served by termination, no permissive exception should apply, and the juvenile court appropriately declined to impose a guardianship or give extra time to work toward reunification.  We therefore affirm both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Sandy, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights to her daughter, A.H., under Iowa Code section 232.116(1), paragraphs (f) and (l) (2024).  The mother contests the grounds for termination, argues termination is not in the child’s best interests, and alternatively contends that the child should have been placed in a guardianship.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding the grounds for termination have been met, termination is in the child’s best interests, and that guardianship is not a viable alternative to termination, we affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights to the child. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Jessica R. Noll, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the statutory grounds for termination have been met and termination is in the best interests of the child, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights to his child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Matthew A. Schuling, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, claiming termination is not in the child’s best interests, and arguing the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, David Brooks, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination, whether termination is in the children’s best interests, and the juvenile court’s decision to not apply a permissive exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established a statutory ground for termination, termination is in the children’s best interests, and we decline to apply a permissive exception to termination.

            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.