2026 Archive | Most Recent Court of Appeals Summaries

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions for possession of methamphetamine, third offense, and unlawful possession of a prescription drug. He argues the State failed to prove he knowingly possessed either the methamphetamine found in a pouch in his pocket or the prescription medication found in his backpack. OPINION HOLDS: Both convictions are supported by substantial evidence because the jury could reasonably infer his knowledge of the methamphetamine from his evasive conduct, shifting explanations, and possession of a pipe, and it could likewise infer his knowledge of the prescription drug from the labeled packaging and his admitted practice of collecting valuable items. Upon our review, we affirm.

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

            Bobby Washington appeals the district court’s order denying his application for postconviction relief in two criminal cases.  He argues defense counsel was ineffective for failing to file post-judgment motions in his failure-to-appear case and that he was actually innocent of that charge.  OPINION HOLDS: Washington’s ineffective-assistance claim is not preserved.  But even if it was, we would find that he did not meet his burden to prove counsel was ineffective.  Giving due weight to the district court’s implicit credibility findings, we also agree that Washington failed to prove his claim of actual innocence.  We therefore affirm the denial of postconviction relief.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Blake H. Norman, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. (6 pages)

            Jan De Jesus Coronel Arreola appeals the district court’s dismissal of his application for postconviction relief and petition for writ of habeas corpus. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, The Honorable Jennifer Miller, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

            Ryan Barnhardt appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR) concerning his conviction of seven counts of sexual abuse in the second degree and three counts of sexual abuse in the third degree.  He alleges ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Barnhardt’s appellate counsel did not breach an essential duty, we conclude that Barnhardt has failed to prove his appellate counsel was ineffective.  Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of his PCR application in its entirety.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Tamra Roberts, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Buller, P.J. (6 pages)

            An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief following his conviction for sexual abuse in the second degree. He argues his trial counsel was ineffective and claims he has newly discovered evidence. OPINION HOLDS: Because we agree with the ruling denying postconviction relief, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable W. Patrick Wegman and The Honorable Patrice J. Eichman, Judges.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Badding, J., and Telleen, S.J. Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (6 pages)

            Kra’ Saunda Lloyd appeals her convictions for person ineligible to carry a dangerous weapon (count I) and possession of marijuana (count III), arguing insufficient evidence supports her conviction under count III and raising constitutional challenges to her conviction for count I.  OPINION HOLDS: Because sufficient evidence supports Lloyd’s conviction under count III and her appeal to count I is foreclosed by our supreme court’s ruling in State v. Woods, 23 N.W.3d 258, 262 (Iowa 2025), we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, The Honorable Joshua Schier, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. Dissent by Sandy, J.  (11 pages)

            Rosemary Loper appeals the district court order granting summary judgment for Southeast Iowa Regional Medical Center on her claim of negligence. OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err by granting summary judgment because Loper failed to serve the certificate of merit affidavit required by Iowa Code section 147.140 (2023). DISSENT ASSERTS: By treating routine patient assistance as professional medical judgment, the majority applies Iowa Code section 147.140 (2023) to a claim the statute does not reach. When the statute, which was designed to screen medical-negligence claims, is applied to bar a routine-care claim, the statute is no longer being applied—it is being expanded. Estate of Butterfield v. Chautauqua Guest Home, Inc., 987 N.W.2d 834 (Iowa 2023), does not permit that expansion, and neither should we. I respectfully dissent.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Paul D. Scott, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (10 pages)

            Robert Allen III appeals his conviction and sentence for attempted burglary in the third degree as a sexually motivated offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Allen’s conviction is supported by substantial evidence.  And the district court did not impose a fixed sentencing policy or abuse its discretion when it sentenced Allen to a term of incarceration to run consecutively to his sentence for a probation violation.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, The Honorable Amy Zacharias, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (8 pages)

            Blaha Roofing, LLC appeals the district court’s award of damages to Larry Strange based on his breach-of-contract claim. Blaha argues the court erred in finding that Strange did not breach the contract and that Strange failed to mitigate his damages. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because the district court’s breach-of-contract finding is supported by substantial evidence, and evidence shows Strange did not fail to mitigate his damages. We modify the amount of damages awarded to offset the amount unpaid under the contract.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, The Honorable Shawn R. Showers, Judge. 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. (18 pages)

            Former spouses separately appeal and cross-appeal from a modification proceeding following the dissolution of their marriage. They raise a variety of claims about physical care of their children, the visitation schedule, income for purposes of child support, trial-attorney fees, fees owed to the child and family reporter (CFR), and appellate-attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the custodial provisions and award appellate attorney fees but reverse and remand for further proceedings related to income for purposes of child support and for the court to order the non-prevailing party to pay the CFR fees.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, The Honorable Joseph B. McCarville, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (3 pages)

            Jesse Edwards challenges a term of probation imposed following his guilty plea to burglary in the third degree. He argues that the requirement that he maintain full-time employment, attend school full-time, or some full-time combination of employment and school is an unreasonable requirement because it does not promote his rehabilitation.  OPINION HOLDS: The term of probation does promote Edwards’s rehabilitation, so the district court did not abuse its discretion when setting the terms of probation. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clayton County, The Honorable Laura J. Parrish, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (9 pages)

            The Iowa Public Information Board appeals the district court’s ruling on judicial review reversing the Board’s order dismissing an open-records complaint by Hendrick Van Pelt against the City of West Des Moines as legally insufficient. The Board argues that it correctly dismissed the open-record complaint because the deployment plan that Van Pelt sought from the City was not of or belonging to the City but rather a third-party contractor who was not performing a fundamental governmental duty or function. OPINION HOLDS: The unique facts and posture of this case, as well as binding precedent from our court, compel us to affirm the district court. The City is a party to its contract with the third-party contractor, and thus the entire agreement—which expressly includes the deployment plan—belongs to the City just as much as it belongs to the contractor. And published precedent instructs that government bodies must produce documents that are otherwise public records and readily available. Thus, Van Pelt’s complaint is, at least at this preliminary stage, legally sufficient. So we affirm the district court’s judgment reversing and remanding Van Pelt’s complaint for further proceedings before the Board.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Henry County, The Honorable Shane M. Wiley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (9 pages)

            Douglas Moore appeals the denial of his postconviction relief application.  He alleges ineffective assistance of counsel. OPINION HOLDS: We find Moore’s counsel did not breach an essential duty to inform him of his potential consequences under Iowa Code section 903B.2 (2022).  Moore could not prove prejudice on his remaining two issues of his counsel’s failures to seek a binding plea agreement or to file a motion in arrest of judgment.  Thus, he failed to prove counsel was ineffective, and we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Jeffrey Farrell, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (8 pages)

            In this workers’ compensation case, the employer challenges the district court’s order affirming the agency’s decision granting the worker’s application for alternate care based on judicial estoppel.  Though the employer entered an agreement for settlement related to the worker’s knee injury, it denied liability for what it claims was a different injury to the knee.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the employer denied liability for what it claimed was a different injury to the knee, the worker’s application for alternate care was required to be dismissed until a determination of compensability could be made. As such, we reverse the district court’s decision affirming the agency decision to grant the application for alternate medical care. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Benton County, The Honorable Christopher L. Bruns, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (8 pages)

            Mark and Kimberly Thomsen appeal the district court’s judgment after a bench trial that their neighbors, David and Carmona Behrens established a new boundary of their properties by acquiescence. The Thomsens argue that the court’s boundary-by-acquiescence ruling is not supported by substantial evidence and that the court erred in declining to decide two alternative claims also advanced by the Behrenses. OPINION HOLDS: Our scrutiny of the record reveals that substantial evidence supports the district court’s ruling. To be sure, the Thomsens point us to evidence that cuts the other way. But under the governing standard of review, we only ask whether substantial evidence supports the findings the district court actually made. And through that lens, we find sufficient evidence that the Behrenses believed the fence was the property boundary and the Thomsens implicitly acquiesced to their ownership for at least ten years. We thus affirm and do not address the Thomsens’ other arguments that the court should have reached and rejected the Behrenses’ two alternative claims for relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Stuart P. Werling, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. Dissent by Badding, J.(22 pages)

            Richard Noll appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled substance, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized during a traffic stop. A deputy found the controlled substance—two baggies of methamphetamine—in Noll’s pocket during a full-body search. The district court found no grounds to suppress because the deputy conducted a search incident to arrest. Noll contends the warrantless search of his pockets “did not follow or accompany an arrest; instead, it produced the basis for the arrest.” OPINION HOLDS: Noll is correct—“a search is not to be made legal by what it turns up.” United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 595 (1948). Here, the State cannot show that the deputy had probable cause to arrest Noll before finding the methamphetamine. And even if the deputy had probable cause to arrest for another offense, his search of Noll was not incident to an arrest based on that probable cause. So the search-incident-to-arrest exception did not apply. Thus, we reverse the district court’s denial of Noll’s motion to suppress and remand for further proceedings. DISSENT ASSERTS: I would affirm the district court’s denial of Noll’s motion to suppress. The deputy had probable cause to arrest Noll for an open-container violation, so the search of Noll’s person was incident to a lawful arrest. And because probable cause is an objective standard, it makes no difference that the deputy gave a different reason for arresting Noll. I would also reject Noll’s final argument that the deputy’s initial pat-down was unjustified and unlawfully prolonged the stop. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Tabitha Turner, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (5 pages)

            George Chambers appeals his conviction and sentence after pleading guilty to first-degree harassment. He argues that the district court erred in finding that his competency was restored and that the court’s notice of firearm prohibition violates his right to bear arms under the state and federal constitutions. OPINION HOLDS: Assuming that he has not waived his competency argument, we agree with the district court that the record shows that Chambers’s competency was restored. And the notice of firearm is not a term of his sentence properly before us on direct appeal because it has no independent force and effect. We thus affirm Chambers’s conviction and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, The Honorable Clinton R. Boddicker, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (8 pages)

            In this interlocutory appeal, a defendant in a personal-injury case challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss based on claims of ineffective and untimely service of original notice.  OPINION HOLDS: The plaintiff failed to strictly comply with the service procedure set forth in Iowa Code section 321.501 (2024) because the defendant neither received nor refused the mailed notice.  The district court erred in finding otherwise, and the appropriate remedy is to remand for dismissal of the plaintiff’s petition without prejudice due to failure to timely serve the defendant. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Robert Richter, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J. Opinion by Sandy, J. (8 pages)

            Martinez Brimmer appeals his conviction for acting as an accessory after the fact, claiming (1) the State did not present sufficient evidence to prove that he had knowledge Michael Rogers committed a crime when he gave him a ride or that he intended to help Rogers avoid arrest. Brimmer also claims (2) the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for a new trial. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Calhoun County, The Honorable Kurt J. Stoebe and The Honorable Derek Johnson, Judges. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (9 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for sexual abuse in the third degree. OPINION HOLDS: Finding sufficient evidence supported the verdict and it was not against the greater weight of the evidence, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and the district court’s denial of his motion for new trial.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, The Honorable Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (11 pages)

            A mother appeals the denial of her private petition to terminate the parental rights of the father of their eleven-year-old daughter. The district court found the mother proved abandonment but decided termination was not in the child’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we disagree with the district

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Howard County, The Honorable John J. Sullivan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Buller, J. (11 pages)

            A farmer appeals the inclusion of finance charges in a judgment and the denial of his counterclaim for breach of contract. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Iowa Code chapter 203 (2021) does not authorize us to invalidate the contracts, the Iowa Uniform Commercial Code applies, substantial evidence (including credibility determinations) supports the district court’s ruling, and the procedural challenge to the affirmative defense was waived, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Tamra Roberts, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (5 pages)

            A defendant appeals his sentence following several guilty pleas, claiming the district court applied a fixed sentencing policy in denying him probation. OPINION HOLDS: The evidence shows district court used its discretion in sentencing and did not follow a fixed sentencing policy.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Tamra Roberts, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (2 pages)

            A defendant appeals his sentence following a guilty plea to burglary in the second degree and domestic abuse assault with a dangerous weapon, claiming the district court abused its discretion. OPINION HOLDS: We must dismiss this appeal because his crimes are not class “A” felonies and he failed to show good cause to appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, The Honorable Eric J. Nelson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (9 pages)

            A father of two sons appeals the denial of his request to hold their mother in contempt for violating a visitation order. OPINION HOLDS: The father did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the mother acted in willful defiance of parenting time provisions. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Stuart P. Werling, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (11 pages)

            Sterling Kingery appeals from the economic provisions of the dissolution decree dividing the equity in the marital residence he shared with Jennifer Mejia-Kingery. He also requests appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: Because of Sterling’s contributions through payments and physical labor, we find it equitable to award him a higher amount of the home equity. We modify the decree of dissolution of marriage and order judgment against Jennifer and in favor of Sterling in the amount of $5,000, with credit for any payments made on the original award.  We deny Sterling’s request for attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Melissa Anderson-Seeber, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            Mynesia Anderson appeals the denial of her motion to vacate a default-judgment custody decree entered in 2017.  The district court found Anderson’s March 2025 motion was untimely.  But according to Anderson, the judgment she seeks to vacate is “constitutionally void” and “void judgments may be vacated at any time.”  OPINION HOLDS: Although jurisdictional challenges are generally exempt from the one-year limitation in Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.1013, the record is clear that Anderson could have sought relief well before March 2025.  She cannot attack the judgment now, especially given the disruptive effect of vacating an eight-year-old custody arrangement.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, The Honorable Richard D. Stochl, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (10 pages)

            The father appeals the modification of the visitation schedule of his teenage daughter with her mother. He contends the district court erred in finding a material change in circumstances warranting modification and asserts that modification is not in their daughter’s best interests. The mother defends the modification order, arguing the district court properly decided that the father should not have “veto power” over her visitation. OPINION HOLDS: Because we disapprove of the provision in the custody order delegating “sole discretion” to the father to determine the mother’s visitation, and because we find there was a material change of circumstances, we agree that modification is appropriate. But we modify the new schedule to eliminate the overnight visits, finding that sudden escalation of visitation contrary to the teen’s best interests.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Erik Howe, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to two girls.  She challenges the court’s best-interests finding and requests six more months to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Although a concurrent plan for adoption did not exist at the time of the hearing, we agree with the juvenile court that termination will serve the children’s best interests.  And because the mother did not show the necessary progress to justify an additional delay of permanency, we decline to disturb the juvenile court’s refusal of a six-month extension.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Rachael E. Seymour, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (3 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, challenging the district court’s determination that termination is in the child’s best interest. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Michelle Jungers, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (8 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights. The father argues that termination of his rights is not in the children’s best interests and the juvenile court should have instead given him more time to work toward reunification or established guardianships for the children.  The mother challenges the statutory ground authorizing termination and contends that termination is not in the children’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: Termination of the father’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests. There is no basis to grant the father additional time, and a guardianship would not best serve the children’s interests. The children cannot be safely returned to the mother’s custody, establishing a statutory ground for termination. And termination of her rights is in the children’s best interests.  

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to a child. OPINION HOLDS: We find termination of parental rights to be in the child’s best interest, and—to the extent any exception is before us—the court did not err in declining to invoke the permissive bond exception. We affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Christopher L. Bruns, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (17 pages)

            A homeowner, Michael Holmstedt, appeals the district court’s summary-judgment ruling dismissing his declaratory judgment action against his condominium association’s board of directors, the Lexington East Unit One Owners Association, and the court’s order awarding attorney fees to the Board. He argues that a fact dispute remains about whether the limited financial reviews obtained by the Board for 2018, 2020, and 2022 comply with the requirement in the association’s bylaws for “an audit of the accounts and financial records of the Association.” And he argues that the court erred in awarding the Board attorney fees under a bylaws provision that it concluded authorizes attorney fees in any suit in which the Board is a party. OPINION HOLDS: The court did not err in granting summary judgment. While Holmstedt’s interpretation of the bylaws’ audit requirement is not unreasonable, he failed to generate a material factual dispute because the Board’s interpretation is also reasonable and entitled to deference under the bylaws and the business-judgment rule. But we agree with Holmstedt’s challenge to the attorney-fees award. The bylaws provision relied on by the district court—when properly interpreted in its full context—only authorizes attorney fees when the association sues for a money judgment on unpaid assessments or other sums due or to foreclose on its assessment lien. Neither situation exists here. So we reverse the attorney-fees award based on that bylaws provision.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, The Honorable Jeffrey L. Larson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (7 pages)

            The applicant appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief alleging his trial and postconviction counsel were ineffective.  He contends trial counsel coerced him to plead guilty and he did so only under duress.  He also contends neither trial nor PCR counsel effectively investigated his claim of actual innocence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find neither attorney failed in any essential duty, we affirm the denial of relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Linda M. Fangman, Judge. AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Marlon Harris Jr. appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing the district court erred in rejecting his claim that trial counsel failed to fully investigate an intoxication defense to Harris’s first-degree robbery charge.  OPINION HOLDS: Harris failed to present proof of the existence of any evidence that he complains trial counsel failed to investigate or present at his trial.  Because he has failed to show prejudice, we affirm the denial of postconviction relief. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, The Honorable Joel W. Barrows, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions of first-degree arson and first-degree murder, arguing the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the individual who committed those crimes. OPINION HOLDS: Because sufficient evidence supports his convictions, we affirm on both counts.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Kevin McKeever, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. Special concurrence by Sandy, J. Dissent by Badding, J. (24 pages)

            A defendant appeals his convictions for murder and going armed with intent. He contends the district court abused its discretion in failing to grant his for-cause challenge regarding a jury member who knew of his prior guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find the juror had actual bias under Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.18(5)(o), we reverse and remand for a new trial. SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in result but concur separately to emphasize that when a juror’s continued service requires their suppression of information the law forbids the jury to hear, the error is not cured by that juror’s promise “not to tell the other jurors.” DISSENT ASSERTS: Rule 2.18(5)(o) is concerned with actual bias—and that is lacking here.  Because R.L. expressed no actual bias against Walker, and the circumstances did not otherwise indicate R.L. could not remain impartial, I would defer to the district court’s privileged position to determine R.L.’s fitness for jury service.  I would also affirm the district court’s findings on the other two issues Walker raises in this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, The Honorable Kathryn E. Austin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Ricardo Velez Jr. appeals his conviction and sentence for harassment in the second degree.  On appeal, he combines a weight-of-the-evidence and sufficiency challenge to the State’s proof on whether he made a threat to commit bodily injury.  He also challenges the district court’s decision to run his sentence consecutively to the sentence in another case. OPINION HOLDS: Velez’s challenge to the weight of the evidence was not preserved for appellate review.  The evidence was sufficient to support his conviction for harassment in the second degree, and the district court provided adequate reasons for imposing consecutive sentences.  Accordingly, we affirm Velez’s conviction and sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable John Telleen and The Honorable Henry Latham II, Judges. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Telleen, S.J., takes no part. Opinion by Buller, J. (9 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his recidivist conviction for domestic abuse assault, contesting the admission of an unavailable witness’s statements and arguing the district court denied him a bifurcated trial on his prior convictions OPINION HOLDS: Because the State met its burden to prove forfeiture-by-wrongdoing, we affirm the conviction. As to the bifurcated trial issue, we find the district court erred in denying the defendant a bifurcated trial and vacate the recidivist enhancement and remand with directions.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Katie Ranes, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (4 pages)

              A daughter appeals a district court order compelling her to cover all fees and costs associated with her petition to establish a guardianship and conservatorship for her mother, which was voluntarily dismissed two weeks after filing. OPINION HOLDS: Because good cause supports the court’s fee order, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm. We further award respondent’s counsel $3,100 in appellate attorney fees.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Gregory D. Brandt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (11 pages)

              Peter Vannausdle appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicating after a conditional guilty plea, challenging only the denial of his motion to suppress. He argues that the district court erred in failing to suppress: (1) statements about his drinking that he made during the traffic stop because the deputy sheriff did not first advise him of his Miranda rights and (2) evidence of his refusal to submit to chemical testing because the deputy violated his rights to see his father in person and to call an attorney under Iowa Code section 804.20 (2023). OPINION HOLDS: Vannausdle was not in custody during the deputy’s traffic-stop questioning, so Miranda’s protections did not apply. Neither did the deputy hinder Vannausdle’s exercise of his rights under section 804.20. Vannausdle made multiple phone calls to family members, and the deputy’s response to questioning during one of those calls that Vannausdle’s father would have to wait to take Vannausdle home did not violate section 804.20. So too did Vannausdle have ample chance to call an attorney, and the deputy had no duty to take further action to facilitate a call because of Vannausdle’s comments about an attorney.

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

            Aaron Secor appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, asserting the district court erred in finding that trial counsel was not ineffective by failure to move for a mistrial and not filing motions in arrest of judgment or for new trial, and that appellate counsel was not ineffective by raising a single unpreserved claim on direct appeal. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Tom Reidel, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (16 pages)

            Marchant appeals his convictions for sexual exploitation of a minor and invasion of privacy, claiming (1) the State presented insufficient evidence that he had knowledge or responsibility for the hidden cameras and the nude videos and images. He claims the district court abused its discretion in (2) excluding evidence that a topless photo of the victim had been found on the victim’s cellphone; (3) admitting an extraction report of Google emails referencing purported phone factory reset attempts; (4) excluding a text message exchange between the victim’s mother and her paramour; and (5) admitting evidence of bookmarks to stepfather/stepdaughter-related pornographic websites. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Christopher L. Bruns, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Langholz, J., and Mullins, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, S.J.  (5 pages)

            Nathan Brocks appeals the district court’s order denying his application for postconviction relief.  He contends his first-degree burglary conviction was the product of ineffective assistance because trial counsel failed to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence showing the apartment he entered was “an occupied structure in which one or more persons are present.” Iowa Code § 713.3 (2019).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the defense Brocks alleges would have been meritless under our supreme court’s binding precedent, we find no breach of duty or prejudice in counsel’s failure to raise it.  We therefore affirm the denial of postconviction relief.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Patrick H. Tott, Judge. CONVICTION CONDITIONALLY AFFIRMED AND REMANDED FOR RECONSIDERATION OF MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J. (5 pages)

            Mario Alberto Corona Ruiz appeals his conviction for first-degree murder.  On appeal, he argues there was insufficient evidence he acted with premeditation, malice aforethought, and specific intent to kill when he shot the victim.  Then, Corona Ruiz argues the district court failed to independently weigh the evidence against the jury’s verdict in denying his motion for new trial. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we conditionally affirm Corona Ruiz’s conviction and remand for the district court to reconsider his motion for new trial. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, The Honorable John J. Haney, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED ON APPEAL, AFFIRMED ON CROSS-APPEAL.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (11 pages)

            Brenda Huegerich appeals the property-division, spousal-support, and trial-attorney-fee provisions of the district court’s decree dissolving her marriage to Steven Huegerich.  Steven cross-appeals the spousal-support award.  Both parties seek appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: We modify the property-division provisions of the decree after accounting for several debts not accounted for by the district court.  We affirm the court’s spousal-support and trial-attorney-fee determinations.  We deny Steven’s request for appellate attorney fees and order him to pay one-half of the appellate attorney fees requested by Brenda.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Patrick A. McElyea, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (10 pages)

            Damon Stalkfleet appeals the district court ruling in favor of Edgar Stroughmatt’s motion for summary judgment. He asserts there are genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Stroughmatt possessed actual knowledge of peril to be apprehended because of improper training and faulty equipment leading to Stalkfleet’s brother’s death, based on alleged co-employee gross negligence. He also alleges that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether bystander liability extends to Stalkfleet because he witnessed his brother’s injuries. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Stroughmatt.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable David P. Odekirk, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (11 pages)

            This appeal arises from a jury’s verdict finding Devin Toler guilty of child endangerment causing bodily injury to his infant son. Toler challenges the weight of the evidence, portions of the State’s closing argument, the sentencing court’s consideration of alleged unproven conduct, and the scope and duration of the no-contact order OPINION HOLDS: After careful review of the record, we affirm, concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Toler’s motion for new trial, overruling his claims of prosecutorial error, imposing sentence, or entering a no-contact order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, The Honorable Michael Jacobsen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            Michael Leahey appeals the property division set out in the decree dissolving his marriage to Heather Darling.  OPINION HOLDS: I. Michael challenges the exclusion of Heather’s inherited property from the overall property division, arguing that his marital contributions increased the value of the inherited property.  But the evidence does not show that Michael contributed to the increase in the value of Heather’s inherited property and excluding it from the property division is not unjust.  II. We award Heather $7,500 in appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Kossuth County, The Honorable Shayne Mayer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (9 pages)

            A beneficiary to Arthur Kahler’s will appeals the district court’s construction of that will. The beneficiary contends there is a scrivener’s error that we can correct to direct Arthur’s after-acquired property to the beneficiary’s family. OPINION HOLDS: The will contains a false description of real property, resulting in the devise being void. So, we affirm the district court’s decision that the after-acquired property must pass through article four of the will, which devises the residue of Arthur’s estate.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, The Honorable Amy M. Moore, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (8 pages)

            Walmart, Inc. and Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust appeal the district court’s ruling upholding the Marshall County Board of Review’s 2023 property tax assessment.  Walmart argues the district court erred when it (1) accepted an appraisal which assumed the store was leased when it was owner-occupied, and (2) found the board’s appraisal more credible than Walmart’s.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on our de novo review, we find the district court did not err in accepting the methodology of the Board’s expert witness.  And we find no error in the district court finding the Board’s expert more credible than Walmart’s experts. 

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (4 pages)

              Sean Michael Hilliard appeals the dismissal of his second postconviction relief application as time-barred. OPINION HOLDS: Because applying the three-year limitations period within Iowa Code section 822.3 (2024) does not offend due process, nor has Hilliard shown he was in fact precluded from timely bringing an ineffective-assistance claim against first PCR counsel, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable DeDra Schroeder, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. (4 pages)

            Elgin Richmond appeals his sentence, claiming the district court failed to consider certain mitigating factors. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion when imposing Richmond’s sentence, we affirm.

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

            Troy Meyer appeals the district court’s sentencing decision following his guilty plea, including the imposition of restitution. Meyer claims the district court erred by not considering all relevant factors when formulating the sentencing decision and in failing to explain why the sentence differed from the plea agreement. Meyer also contends that there was insufficient evidence of the amount of damages imposed in the restitution order. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find no abuse of discretion by the district court in the sentencing decision and no error in the restitution portion of the sentencing order. We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Mark D. Fisher, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (10 pages)

            Cabrina Pflughaupt and James Pflughaupt appeal the probate court’s order rejecting their proposal to purchase farmland from their mother’s estate and removing them as co-executors for self-dealing and other grounds.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree that the co-executors, through their self-dealing, have mismanaged the estate and failed to perform their fiduciary duties.  Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the order of the probate court on all issues and remand for further proceedings

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Tod Deck, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Langholz, J. (4 pages)

              Jeremy Saul appeals his convictions for eluding and first-degree theft as a habitual offender, challenging only the sufficiency of the evidence that he was the person who committed these offenses. OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict that Saul was the driver of the stolen car in the high-speed chase. We thus affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, The Honorable John J. Haney, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (7 pages)

            Following his felony convictions for lascivious acts with a child and misdemeanor conviction for indecent contact with a child, Kenneth Burke appeals the sentence imposed, asserting that the district court abused its discretion. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, The Honorable Alan T. Heavens, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (17 pages)

            Tony and Rebecca Seitz appeal an order recognizing an easement on their property for ingress and egress to Ryan Lutze’s neighboring property. OPINION HOLDS: Because an easement was neither continuously and obviously used nor reasonably necessary at the time the parties’ properties were separated, the district court erred in granting Lutze’s claim for an easement by implication and Lutze’s claim for an easement by necessity also fails. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the district court for further proceedings.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, The Honorable Shayne Mayer, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (8 pages)

            Tayten Darnell appeals the custody and child-support order under Iowa Code chapter 600B (2024) that placed his daughter in the physical care of her mother, Emily Mairose. OPINION HOLDS: Considering which placement would best provide stability for the daughter and foster her relationships with both parents, we modify the decree to place the daughter in Tayten’s physical care. We also remand the case to the district court to establish a visitation schedule for Emily and calculate an appropriate child-support award. And we decline Emily’s request for appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Robert J. Richter, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (5 pages).

            Sara Krausman appeals the sentences imposed by the district court following a global plea agreement. She asserts the district court failed to indicate whether her sentences would run concurrently or consecutively and only indicated that in the event her probation was revoked, the sentences for certain counts would run consecutively. She argues the imposed sentence was illegal, and that her sentences should be presumed to run concurrently. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, The Honorable Christopher C. Polking, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Harold and Jody Johnson (the Johnsons) appeal the district court’s ruling granting summary judgement for Farmers Mutual Hail Insurance Company of Iowa (Farmers).  The Johnsons allege Farmers should be equitably estopped from claiming the contractual limitations period had expired.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the two-year contractual limitations period had run and the Johnsons have not shown that they requested their insurance policy from Farmers who refused to provide it, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, The Honorable Shayne Mayer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J. (6 pages)

            Jessica Ries appeals the district court's order denying her motion to suppress.  She argues law enforcement’s search and seizure of her person lacked probable cause.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Ries consented to the search of her person, we affirm the district court’s denial of Ries’ motion to suppress. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Robert J. Richter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (5 pages)

            Brian Bennett appeals his sentences after pleading guilty to third-degree burglary and domestic abuse assault.  He argues the court abused its discretion by relying predominantly on his criminal history in determining his sentences.  OPINION HOLDS: Simply because the district court weighed Bennett’s criminal history more heavily than the mitigating factors does not mean the court abused its sentencing discretion.  We affirm Bennett’s sentences.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Linda M. Fangman, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (5 pages)

            Janackery Winston argues the district court abused its discretion by imposing incarceration rather than a suspended sentence, asserting the court failed to adequately credit his mental-health history, remorse, and prospects for rehabilitation. OPINION HOLDS: Because the sentence was authorized by statute and grounded in a reasoned assessment of the relevant factors, Winston has not overcome the strong presumption in favor of the district court’s sentencing decision, and we thus affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Gregory D. Brandt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Langholz, J. (7 pages)

            Alfredo Lorenzo Pena appeals his two-year indeterminate prison sentence after pleading guilty to operating while intoxicated, second offense. He argues that the district court improperly considered unproven conduct and failed to comply with Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.23(2)(b) and Iowa Code section 901.5(7). OPINION HOLDS: The court’s reliance on defense counsel’s statements about the probation officer’s recommendation against probation and Lorenzo Pena’s conduct while on probation was not improper. The court’s question to Lorenzo Pena before imposing sentence substantially complied with rule 2.23(2)(b). And assuming that the court was required to inform Lorenzo Pena he had already served the mandatory minimum, that omission does not invalidate his sentencing. We thus affirm Lorenzo Pena’s sentence.

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

              Bradley Jaquith appeals from the district court’s final domestic abuse protective order. The district court found Bradley committed domestic abuse against his wife, Abbey Jaquith. Bradley argues insufficient evidence supports such a finding. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Grundy County, The Honorable Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (3 pages)

            Scafferi Enterprises, LLC appeals from a jury verdict in favor of Justin Wise, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence showing Scafferi was obligated to complete the reconstruction of Wise’s fire-damaged home.  OPINION HOLDS: Our review in this case is for correction of errors at law.  Because Scafferi never moved for a directed verdict, it failed to preserve any claim of legal error related to the sufficiency of the evidence.  Accordingly, we decline to consider this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (3 pages)

            Stephanie Beveridge appeals her sentence following entry of a guilty plea. OPINION HOLDS: Because Beveridge received the sentence agreed upon by the parties in the plea agreement, she cannot establish good cause to appeal.  Because she cannot establish good cause to appeal, we do not have jurisdiction and dismiss the appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Madison County, The Honorable Terry Rickers, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (8 pages)

            Katie Dekker appeals the district court’s ruling modifying the dissolution decree between her and Bradley Witt. She contends the district court erred in modifying the decree to grant both her and Bradley joint physical care of the children. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we conclude the district court did equity in determining that a shared physical care arrangement serves the best interests of the children.

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

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to two daughters. The mother challenges the statutory grounds for termination. Both parents advocate for the application of a statutory exception to termination. The father doesn’t challenge the statutory grounds for termination but contends termination was not in the children’s best interests. He also advocates for placing the children in a guardianship with his mother. OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the statutory grounds for termination of the mother’s rights and the parents failed to show an exception applies. Termination of the father’s rights was in their best interests. And the circumstances are inappropriate for a guardianship with the maternal grandmother. So, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Amy M. Moore, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J. (6 pages)

            Kamryn Jacobsen appeals the order granting her joint physical care of the child she shares with Austin Wood. OPINION HOLDS:  The record supports awarding the parties joint physical care of the child.  We decline to award appellate attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Kimberly Ayotte, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (8 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their son. The mother argues that termination of her parental rights is not in the son’s best interest. In his petition on appeal and many other appellate motions, the father challenges jurisdiction and generally assails the legitimacy of both the child-in-need-of-assistance and termination proceedings. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm both terminations. We will not delay permanency for the son while the mother travels the long road of imprisonment and recovery. As for the father, we have carefully reviewed the record and find no jurisdictional, statutory, or evidentiary errors that require reversal. And we agree that the State proved that termination was warranted and in the son’s best interest.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Rachael E. Seymour, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (13 pages)

              After parental rights were terminated, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe moved to transfer the child-custody proceedings to tribal court under Iowa Code chapter 232B (2025). The juvenile court denied the request, finding good cause based on perceived logistical and procedural hardships. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, the record does not support that conclusion. Because the statutory exception to mandatory transfer was not established, the court was required to grant the Tribe’s motion. We therefore reverse and remand for transfer of jurisdiction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Brent Pattison, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Ahlers and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (12 pages)

            A guardian ad litem appeals the denial of a petition for termination of a father’s parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Finding termination of the father’s rights and establishing permanency is in the children’s best interests, we reverse and remand with directions to terminate the father’s parental rights.

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

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She contends the State failed to prove a statutory ground for termination and argues a permissive exception to termination should apply based on the closeness of the mother–child relationship.  The mother asks this court to reverse the termination or grant her more time to work toward reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights and deny her request for additional time.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Lynn Poschner, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Badding, P.J., and Chicchelly and Langholz, JJ., but decided en banc. Opinion by Langholz, J. Dissent by Schumacher, J.  (18 pages)

            The State appeals a juvenile court order transferring guardianship and custody of the children to their foster parents rather than the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services after termination of the parental rights of the children’s parents. The State argues that the juvenile court was required to appoint the Department as guardian under Iowa Code section 232.117(3) (2025) because the Department did not waive its priority. OPINION HOLDS: Section 232.117(3) gives the Department the highest priority in consideration among the four categories of potential guardians. But it authorizes the juvenile court to select from “any of” those categories. And like the rest of chapter 232, the court must consider the child’s best interest along with the order of priority in selecting the appropriate guardian. We thus reject the State’s argument on appeal that the juvenile court was mandated to appoint the Department as guardian merely because the Department had not waived its right to first-priority consideration. Because the State makes no other challenge to the juvenile court’s order, we affirm.  DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion, as I disagree with the determination that Iowa Code section 232.117(3) does not require the court to place custody and guardianship with the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services following termination, absent waiver by the Department. I would reverse and remand with instructions to appoint the Department as the guardian and custodian of J.B. and R.R.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, The Honorable Patrick McAvan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, P.J. (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  He challenges the juvenile court’s findings that termination is in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s order terminating the father’s parental rights.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, The Honorable Erica Crisp, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (12 pages)

              A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we agree that the child could not be returned to the mother at the time of the termination hearing and it was in the child’s best interests to terminate the mother’s parental rights, so we affirm the termination of parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Shelby County, The Honorable Charles D. Fagan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. She argues (1) there was insufficient evidence supporting the grounds for termination, (2) the State failed to make reasonable reunification efforts, (3) termination of her parental rights is not in the best interests of the children, and (4) the State failed to prove that the children could not be returned to the mother at the time of termination.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find clear and convincing evidence supports termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e), termination is in the children’s best interests, and the mother did not preserve error on her reasonable efforts argument.  Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Kristal Phillips, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

            The parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their toddler daughter. OPINION HOLDS: The State presented clear and convincing evidence that the child cannot be returned to their custody and it is in her best interests to terminate their parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, The Honorable Joan M. Black, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Badding, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (10 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their son. The father claims the district court erred in concluding the child could not safely be returned to his custody, termination is not in the child’s best interests, and the parent-child bond should preclude termination. The mother requests an extension of time to work toward reunification and contends the court erred in rejecting her request to reopen the record to accept evidence of her continued participation in reunification services after the termination hearing. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Adam D. Sauer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (6 pages)

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

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (15 pages)

               Defendant appeals his convictions of first-degree murder and two counts of first-degree burglary, asserting a lack of substantial evidence to support the convictions. OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Paul D. Scott, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (4 pages)

               A defendant appeals the denial of a motion in arrest of judgment after a guilty plea, arguing the legislature violated ex post facto principles when it eliminated the lookback period for prior offenses of domestic abuse assault under Iowa Code section 708.2A in determining if a violation is a second or subsequent offense.  OPINION HOLDS: We do not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal because the defendant failed to preserve error on his ex-post-facto claim.

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

            Jon Zimmerman appeals the sentence imposed after his guilty plea for failing to comply with the sex offender registry, second offense.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not impose an illegal sentence when it sentenced Zimmerman to prison but suspended the applicable fine and surcharge, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (9 pages)

               Jamie Wilson appeals the district court order modifying the physical-care provision of the decree dissolving his marriage with Katie Wilson. He argues that there has not been a substantial change in circumstances and that the children’s best interests are served by continuing joint physical care rather than placement in Katie’s physical care. And Katie seeks an award of appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving due deference to the district court in this close case, we affirm. We find Jamie’s OWI conviction—and its impact on Jamie and Katie’s ability to effectively coparent because of his concealment of it—qualifies as a substantial change in circumstances warranting modification. We also agree that the modification is in the children’s best interests. And given the relative closeness of the merits and the parties’ respective abilities to pay, we decline Katie’s request for appellate attorney fees.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Karen Romano and The Honorable Christopher Kemp, Judges. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. (7 pages)

              Rodney Borushaski appeals from the district court’s denial of his second application for postconviction relief. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, The Honorable Jennifer S. Bailey, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (3 pages)

               Michael Dunn appeals his sentence for possession of marijuana, challenging only the notice of firearm prohibition issued under Iowa Code section 724.31A (2024). He argues that his conviction does not prohibit him from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving a firearm under federal law and that imposing such a prohibition would violate the state and federal constitutions. OPINION HOLDS: Because the notice of firearm prohibition does not have any independent force and merely informs Dunn that he is subject to other statutory provisions, it is not a term of Dunn’s sentence properly before us on direct appeal. We thus affirm Dunn’s sentence without reaching the merits of his challenge to the notice of firearm prohibition.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, The Honorable Steven J. Holwerda, Judge. CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCES VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Cody Minenga appeals his convictions and sentences for operating while under the influence and carrying weapons while intoxicated.  On appeal he argues (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions, and (2) the sentencing court abused its discretion by considering his criminal history and by failing to give reasons for running Minenga’s sentences consecutively.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm Minenga’s convictions, but we vacate his sentences and remand for resentencing. 

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, The Honorable Laura Parrish, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Buller, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. Dissent by Tabor, C.J. (15 pages)

              A defendant appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated (OWI), challenging the denial of his motion to suppress, and questioning the voluntariness of his consent to a blood sample test. OPINION HOLDS: Because the voluntariness of consent fell within constitutional parameters, we affirm. DISSENT ASSERTS: I respectfully dissent.  I would find that Melcher preserved error on his constitutional claim.  And the State concedes that under recent case law Melcher’s blood test should be suppressed.  We should reverse the suppression ruling and remand for further proceedings.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Lawrence McLellan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Telleen, S.J. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

              An unhoused individual challenges his convictions for failing to register as a sex offender and providing false information to the sex offender registry. He contends that the State failed to offer sufficient proof that he did not pitch his tent under the Grand Avenue bridge in West Des Moines, as he told authorities. OPINION HOLDS: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the district court’s verdicts, we find substantial evidence to support the convictions.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable John R. Flynn, Judge. AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (3 pages)

               Montrell McClellan appeals the district court’s denial of his application for postconviction relief, alleging a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we reach the same conclusions as the district court on our de novo review of the record, we affirm by memorandum opinion.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (11 pages)

               Retired state trooper Matthew Eimers appeals the district court’s post-trial order vacating the jury’s $6,144 award and dismissing Eimers’ wage-collection suit because of his failure to exhaust the grievance procedure under his collective bargaining agreement.  On appeal, Eimers argues his claims are exempt from the exhaustion requirement because the benefits he seeks are guaranteed by statute, not contract.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Eimers’ claims necessarily hinge on an “interpretation or application” of the collective bargaining agreement, he was required to seek a resolution from the department before filing suit.  We therefore affirm the district court’s order finding Eimers’ Iowa Code chapter 91A claims barred.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (7 pages)

               A postconviction applicant alleges his counsel was ineffective by permitting him to plead guilty without a sufficient factual basis.  OPINION HOLDS: We find there was a sufficient factual basis to support the guilty plea and counsel was therefore not ineffective.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clayton County, The Honorable Richard D. Stochl, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

               Connie Reinhardt appeals a district court order finding she failed to prove her claim of adverse possession.  She argues the district court erred in (1) assigning the boundary line using the survey the parties conducted and (2) finding she failed to meet her burden to prove adverse possession.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we accept the concession that Reinhardt partially proved her claim of adverse possession.  We reverse the district court’s dismissal of Reinhardt’s claim and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Guthrie County, The Honorable David Faith, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Telleen, S.J.  Opinion by Telleen, S.J.  (9 pages)

            Allen Albert Carmichael appeals from his conviction and sentence for stalking by using a technological device.  He argues insufficient evidence supports his conviction, the district court erred in failing to give a requested jury instruction, and the district court abused its discretion in failing to grant him a deferred judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because sufficient evidence supports Carmichael’s conviction and the district court did not err or abuse its discretion, we affirm.  

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Henry W. Latham, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Buller, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (8 pages)

               A defendant brings a delayed appeal of her convictions for carrying a dangerous weapon by a person ineligible and possession of marijuana, arguing there is insufficient evidence that the substance she possessed was marijuana.  OPINION HOLDS: We have jurisdiction over this delayed appeal, and there is sufficient evidence to uphold the defendant’s convictions.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, The Honorable Myron L. Gookin, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (11 pages)

              A defendant appeals his conviction of criminal mischief in the fourth degree in violation of Iowa Code section 716.6(1)(A)(1) (2024). OPINION HOLDS: Because sufficient evidence exists to support his conviction and the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the victim’s prior bad acts, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Steven J. Andreasen, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (13 pages)

               Max Amyda appeals his conviction for third-degree sexual abuse, challenging the admission of a digital video that was sent to the victim online and purportedly shows him sexually abusing the victim while she was asleep. He argues that the State failed to authenticate the video and that its admission violated the best-evidence rule. OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the video. Circumstantial evidence based on the “distinctive characteristics” and other contents of the video and all the surrounding circumstances can also be sufficient to support a finding that the video is what it claims to be—a depiction of the victim being sexually abused by Amyda in early May 2023. So the court was within its discretion to conclude that State made such a showing with the victim’s detailed testimony that she recognized her body, her limited clothing, the room, and Amyda’s hand—all consistent with the only time that he was in her room in early May 2023. So too was the court within its discretion to reject Amyda’s best-evidence challenge. Assuming the rule applies to this video and that the video is not an original, it was still admissible as a duplicate because Amyda’s speculative claims that the video was a “deepfake” without any evidentiary support did not raise a genuine question about the video’s authenticity.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, The Honorable Richard D. Stochl, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (8 pages)

            A group of beneficiaries appeal the denial of their motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. OPINION HOLDS: Finding the statute of limitations on the will did not begin until the controlling family settlement agreement was invalidated and the will was entered into probate, we affirm.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, The Honorable Shane M. Wiley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. (5 pages)

              A defendant appeals his sentencing following a jury trial, claiming the court abused its discretion by deciding to impose consecutive sentences for two convictions arising from the same incident, “despite his numerous mitigating factors.” OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, The Honorable Laura J. Parrish, Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  Special concurrence by Badding, P.J.  (9 pages)

               Randy Lee Merten II appeals the denial of his motion in arrest of judgment, seeking to withdraw his guilty plea to lascivious acts with a child.  OPINION HOLDS: With no grounds upon which to exercise discretionary review, we dismiss this appeal.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I agree that discretionary review should be denied because Merten failed to allege that he would not have pleaded guilty but for his claimed errors.  But I write separately to highlight two issues related to State v. Mitchell, No. 23-0987, 2024 WL 3050726 (Iowa Ct. App. June 19, 2024). 

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, The Honorable Rustin Davenport, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. Buller, J. takes no part. (7 pages)

               John Ancell appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Ancell has not met his burden of proving he is entitled to postconviction relief, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Coleman McAllister, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (8 pages)

            After the Iowa Board of Parole failed to act on Darrell Kackley’s petition for declaratory relief, he sought judicial review in the district court.  The district court denied relief, limiting its review to the board’s failure to issue a declaratory ruling.  Kackley appeals, asserting the district court erred by declining to review the board’s most recent parole denial and by concluding the board properly declined to respond to his petition for declaratory relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We find nothing “unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious” about the board’s failure to act on the petition, and so the district court correctly dismissed Kackley’s petition for judicial review.  Finding no error of law, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

               Terence Manning appeals the district court’s order denying his application for postconviction relief.  He claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for seeking a competency evaluation that he alleges resulted in a violation of his speedy trial rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we find Manning’s trial counsel did not fail to perform an essential duty, we affirm. 

               Certiorari to the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge. WRIT SUSTAINED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (6 pages)

               Gerald Runde Jr. petitions for writ of certiorari challenging the district court’s order sanctioning him $21,804.90. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court failed to make adequate factual findings or cite applicable law in its order imposing sanctions, the district court abused its discretion. We sustain the writ of certiorari and vacate the district court’s sanctions order.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, The Honorable DeDra Schroeder, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (14 pages)

               A mother appeals a final custody order arguing the court erred by granting the father primary physical care, partially denying the mother’s motion to reconsider, and sustaining a foundation objection to one of her exhibits.  The father requests an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm and award the father appellate attorney fees in the amount of $5,000.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (2 pages)

            A physician seeks judicial review of a licensing board’s denial to share his investigative file under Iowa Code section 272C.6(4)(a) (2024). OPINION HOLDS: Bound by controlling supreme court precedent, we affirm.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, The Honorable Amy Zacharias, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Badding, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (6 pages)

              A mother appeals the denial of her motion to set aside the default judgment in a custody matter. The father requests appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the mother failed to show good cause, we affirm. And because he has the greater ability to pay, we decline to award the father attorney fees.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dickinson County, The Honorable Shayne Mayer, Judge.  AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ.  Sandy, J., takes no part.  Opinion by Badding, J.  (12 pages)

            Steven Larson challenges the district court’s denial of his request to modify his spousal support obligation to Kimberlee Larson and its order requiring him to pay her attorney fees.  Both parties request an award of appellate attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Steven’s decision to remain close to family does not constitute a self-inflicted or voluntary reduction in income.  Accordingly, the change in the income gap between the parties warrants a reduction of Steven’s spousal support obligation to $1,000 per month, but it does not justify shortening the duration of the support award.  We affirm the district court’s award of trial attorney fees to Kimberlee and deny both parties’ requests for appellate attorney fees.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, The Honorable Michael Harris, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (13 pages)

               Stephanie Schulte, in her capacity as administrator of Lorena Schulte’s estate and in her own individual capacity, appeals the district court’s order granting the State’s motion to dismiss. OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in finding that Stephanie failed to exhaust her administrative remedies for the claims brought in her capacity as administrator of Lorena’s estate. The district court did err, however, in finding that Stephanie failed to exhaust her administrative remedies for the claims brought in her individual capacity.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, The Honorable Charles Borth, Judge. CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (14 pages)

               A defendant appeals her convictions for possession of a controlled substance challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and a sentencing enhancement imposed by the district court.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm her convictions because there was sufficient evidence to find that Buckley had constructive possession of the controlled substances.  We vacate and remand her sentence for further proceedings with the habitual-offender enhancement because the district court failed to perform a colloquy as required under Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.19(8) and State v. Harrington, 893 N.W.2d 36, 45–47 (Iowa 2017).  

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, The Honorable Lars G. Anderson, Judge. WRIT ANNULLED. Heard at oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (7 pages)

               Durojaiye Rosa seeks appellate review of the district court’s imposition of restitution under Iowa Code section 910.3B (2020) more than two years after he pleaded guilty to and was sentenced for aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter. He contends that imposition of section 910.3B so long after his sentencing violates section 910.3(5) and he should not be subject to section 910.3B restitution because he pleaded guilty under an aiding and abetting theory rather than as a principal actor. OPINION HOLDS: We treat Rosa’s notice of appeal and briefing as a petition for writ of certiorari, grant the writ, and reach the merits of Rosa’s claims. Imposition of section 910.3B restitution is compulsory when applicable. Because section 910.3B applies to Rosa’s conviction for aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter, the district court’s initial failure to impose the mandatory restitution resulted in an illegal sentence. The district court was free to correct that illegal sentence at any time, so section 910.3(5) is not applicable here. And we do not distinguish between defendants convicted under an aiding and abetting theory and those convicted as principal actors. So we annul the writ.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, The Honorable Jessica Noll, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (3 pages)

               Bryan Cordona appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to domestic abuse assault. He argues that the district court abused its discretion in ordering a term of probation requiring him to submit to a search of his person, car, or residence at any time. OPINION HOLDS: Because Cordona agreed to the term of probation that he now challenges, he has failed to show good cause to appeal under Iowa Code section 814.6(1)(a)(3) (2024). We thus lack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buchanan County, The Honorable John J. Sullivan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Buller, P.J. (2 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his discretionary sentence. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion when it considered an uncontested pre-sentence investigation report or the defendant’s commission of new offenses while on probation, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (6 pages)

               Romare Homes, Inc. (Romare) appeals the district court’s ruling granting summary judgement for Lincoln Savings Bank (LSB) in a contract dispute.  Romare argues the district court erred when it concluded (1) Iowa Code section 535.17(4)(2024) does not allow admission of an opposing-party statement of a former employee of LSB, and (2) LSB was entitled to summary judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find Romare’s claims were barred by Iowa Code section 535.17 because a former employee cannot make an in-court admission on behalf of LSB. Because we find the claims were barred by Iowa Code section 535.17, we do not reach Romare’s summary judgment claim. So, we affirm the district court in its entirety.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (15 pages)

               Megan Schollmeyer appeals an order modifying the physical care and child support provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Joseph Wilker. Megan also contests the award of trial attorney fees, and both parties request appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court’s modification order, and we decline to award appellate attorney fees to either party.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Coleman McAllister, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (7 pages)

               Compass Group USA and AIU Insurance Company appeal a district court ruling affirming the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commissioner’s credibility assessments and permanency determination regarding claimant Todd Hawk.  OPINION HOLDS: Substantial evidence supports the credibility assessments and permanency determination, and no error of law was made by the agency.  Accordingly, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, The Honorable John D. Lloyd, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (3 pages)

               A criminal defendant appeals the sentence imposed after he pled guilty to operating while intoxicated, driving while barred, and child endangerment. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court imposed the same sentence agreed upon in the plea agreement, there is no good cause to appeal, and we therefore do not have jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, The Honorable Myron Gookin, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (15 pages)

            Jeremy Young appeals and Devin Young cross-appeals the child-custody provisions of the decree dissolving their marriage. OPINION HOLDS: After considering the circumstances of this case and statutory factors, we affirm the custody provisions of the decree granting the parties joint legal custody and placing the children in Jeremy’s physical care. We also find the visitation schedule set out in the decree serves the children’s best interests.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS:  I agree with the majority that any presumption against joint legal custody is rebutted, but not because of “mutual aggression.”  While the parties both engaged in acts of violence against the other, Jeremy’s acts escalated far beyond those of Devin.  Yet the rebuttal against joint legal custody is supported by other best-interest considerations independent of the parties’ physical conflict, and I concur in the result.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Monica Ackley, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Henry Hayes appeals the sentences imposed after pleading guilty to third-degree burglary.  He argues the district court abused its discretion by imposing this sentence consecutively to a sentence imposed on another matter.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find the district court did not abuse its discretion and affirm. 

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (10 pages)

            Conlon Construction Co. raised several alternative challenges to breach-of-contract counterclaims brought by subcontractors in Conlon’s mechanic’s lien foreclosure suit against the owner and developer of the Estates of Dubuque residential cooperative. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the court’s denial of Conlon’s motion to dismiss the subcontractor counterclaims. But we reverse the court’s denial of Conlon’s motion to compel arbitration and remand for further proceedings.    

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Kristen Formanek, Judge. SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (7 pages)

               Jose Torres Gomez appeals the district court’s sentencing order, arguing the court failed to adequately state its reason for sentencing him to prison and for running the sentences consecutively. OPINION HOLDS: Our state’s sentencing procedures are intended to ensure defendants are well aware of the consequences of their criminal actions and afford our appellate courts the opportunity to review the discretion of the sentencing court. The sentencing court’s failure to accurately complete the check-the-box portion of the sentencing form frustrates and circumvents these two purposes. For that reason, we vacate the district court’s sentencing order and remand for resentencing.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott J. Beattie, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (10 pages)

               Plaintiff Beverly Henry appeals the district court’s order granting the State’s motion to dismiss. OPNION HOLDS: The district court did not err in finding that Henry’s service on the Iowa State Fair Authority does not satisfy the notice requirements for the State, or that Henry’s amended petition failed to relate back due to lack of proper notice.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable David Nelmark, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (9 pages)

               Louis Ngor appeals from the district court’s decree establishing custody, visitation, and support over his children. He contends the district court erred in not placing the children in the parties’ joint physical care and in ordering retroactive child support, and abused its discretion in awarding attorney fees to the mother, Nyabet Kak. OPINION HOLDS: Finding no error or abuse of discretion, we affirm.

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

            The juvenile court terminated the mother’s rights to the child, born in 2014, under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2025). The mother now appeals, arguing termination is not in the child’s best interests, and alternatively, that the court erred in failing to apply a permissive exception to termination due to the parent-child bond or the option of a guardianship. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s order terminating the mother’s parental rights to the child.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jones County, The Honorable Joan M. Black, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (7 pages)

               A mother appeals from a permanency order following a joint permanency and termination hearing.  She appeals the determination that the best interests of the child would be served by changing the permanency goal from reunification with the mother to placing the child in the sole custody of his father pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(d)(1) (2025).  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother’s appeal was untimely, and because the failure to timely file the appeal was within the mother’s control, we do not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Susan Cox, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (6 pages)

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

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Erik I. Howe, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH PARENTS’ APPEALS; INTERVENOR’S APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (10 pages)

              A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights. Both parents challenge the statutory grounds for termination, argue termination is not in the child’s best interests, and ask for six more months for reunification efforts. The intervenor also appeals. OPINION HOLDS: Having reviewed the record de novo, we reach the same conclusion as the district court and affirm. Because the intervenor failed to appeal the termination order, we dismiss the intervenor’s appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Brent Pattison, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2025) with respect to one child and Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) for her other two children.  She challenges the juvenile court’s determination that (1) the statutory grounds supporting termination were proven by clear and convincing evidence, (2) termination was in the children’s best interests, and (3) guardianship in lieu of termination was not a viable option for these children.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find the grounds for termination were proven and termination is in the children’s best interests.  Also, we find the mother’s request for a guardianship was not preserved.  So, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, The Honorable Virginia Cobb, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (16 pages)

               A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to one child. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we conclude the State established the statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence and that the termination was in the child’s best interests.  We decline the mother’s request for an additional six months to remedy her situation.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Worth County, The Honorable Elizabeth Batey, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (3 pages)

               A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights.  Both challenge only the juvenile court’s determination that termination would be in the children’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: Given the long history of child abuse in the familial home and the mother’s efforts to hide it, we agree with the juvenile court that termination of both parent’s rights is in the best interests of their respective children.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Mark Fowler, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (6 pages)

               A mother appeals the juvenile court’s termination of her parental rights by challenging the statutory grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (2025). OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the juvenile court’s determination that the child could not be returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing because she continues to place the child’s father’s needs above the child’s.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Carrie K. Bryner, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, P. J. (3 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (l) (2024). OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination order. 

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, The Honorable Angie Johnston, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., and Langholz and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (9 pages)

               A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, arguing her rights were terminated prematurely, she should be given additional time to work towards reunification, and that the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Thomas J. Straka, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (11 pages)

               A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to one child. Both parents argue that termination was not in the child’s best interests and that they should be given an additional six months to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm the termination of their parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (10 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we conclude an extension of time for reunification efforts is unwarranted, termination is in the child’s best interests, and no permissive exception should be applied to preclude termination. Accordingly, we affirm on both appeals.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Michelle Jungers, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

               A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his two children. He challenges the grounds for termination, contends it is not in their best interests, and asks for more time to reunite with his children. OPINION HOLDS: The State proved the statutory grounds for termination of his parental rights. Termination was in the children’s best interests, and a six-month extension is inappropriate under the circumstances. So, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable David P. Odekirk, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (16 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his conviction for arson in the first degree. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm. We decline to take judicial notice of the defendant’s other case and grant the State’s motion to strike the offending portions of defendant’s reply brief. We find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s new-trial claim. And we reject as unpreserved the defendant’s claim related to choosing between speedy trial and more time for his experts.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, The Honorable Stacy Ritchie, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (16 pages)

               Savannah Cook appeals the denial of her motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for new trial after a special jury verdict that she failed to prove causation in her negligence action against Travis Herduin. She challenges the jury instruction on causation and argues that the district court should have granted her judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial because of the evidence of causation that she introduced at trial. OPINION HOLDS: The district court did not err in instructing the jury on causation—the instructions as a whole fairly covered the issues, did not materially misstate the law, and are not misleading or confusing. Neither did the court err in denying Cook judgment notwithstanding the verdict or abuse its discretion in denying a new trial based on the evidence on causation in the record. While Herduin did not call his own expert witness, he still generated a material factual dispute over causation by raising serious questions about Cook’s credibility in reporting her symptoms and the reliability of her experts’ opinions based mainly on her reports. And we see nothing untenable or unreasonable in the district court’s exercise of its discretion by declining to interfere with the jury verdict. We thus affirm the district court’s judgment dismissing Cook’s petition against Herduin.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, The Honorable Kathryn E. Austin, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (3 pages)

               Gary Jensen appeals the sentence imposed on his conviction for eluding.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Jensen has not met his burden of showing the sentencing court abused its discretion in imposing a sentence of incarceration, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable David P. Odekirk, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (6 pages)

            A defendant appeals his conviction for involuntary manslaughter. OPINION HOLDS: Deferring to the jury’s decision in a battle of the experts, and finding circumstantial evidence supports its determination, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, The Honorable Mark R. Lawson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (9 pages)

            Joseph Watson appeals his convictions for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver and failure to affix a drug tax stamp.  OPINION HOLDS: After giving appropriate deference to the jury’s verdict, we conclude there is substantial evidence to support both convictions.  Accordingly, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (4 pages)

               Evan Moran appeals the summary dismissal of his application for post-conviction relief, which alleged that he had been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. OPINION HOLDS: Because the undisputed factual record shows that Moran’s speedy-trial right was not violated, the district court did not error in summarily dismissing his application.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, The Honorable Margaret Reyes, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

               Richard Arnold contends his trial attorney was ineffective in failing to object to a victim impact statement. He also contends the postconviction relief court applied an incorrect prejudice standard to his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim. OPINION HOLDS: First, Arnold did not show he was prejudiced by counsel’s performance. And Arnold failed to preserve error on his second claim.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Fayette County, The Honorable John J. Sullivan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (11 pages)

               Leroy Kula Jr. appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his application for postconviction relief (PCR).  On appeal, Kula argues trial counsel was ineffective when counsel engaged in incompetent cross-examinations, inadequately investigated potential defense witnesses, and failed to object to the admission of child-protection-center (CPC) interview recordings as exhibits.  Kula additionally argues his PCR counsel was ineffective in failing to raise the issue of cumulative error by trial counsel and an argument to trial counsel’s failure to challenge the CPC-interview exhibits.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.  

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Adam D. Sauer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Sandy, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (10 pages)

               Christopher Kackley appeals from the order resentencing him after a remand.  He contends (1) the district court abused its discretion by running his sentences consecutive to a sentence imposed for a separate offense, (2) the prosecutor breached the plea agreement by recommending consecutive sentences, and (3) the imposition of consecutive sentences is evidence of judicial vindictiveness, violating his right to due process under the Iowa Constitution.  The State contends that the sentencing order for the separate offense renders Kackley’s claims moot.  OPINION HOLDS: The imposition of consecutive sentences in the resentencing order is not moot.  The district court did not exceed its authority by ordering Kackley’s sentences to run consecutive to the sentence imposed in FECR032253.  Kackley cannot show a breach because the plea agreement was silent on FECR032253, which involves an offense committed after the plea agreement was reached and the original sentence was imposed in this case.  Nothing in the record shows judicial vindictiveness. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Celene Gogerty, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Mullins, S.J. Opinion by Mullins, S.J. (14 pages)

            Grant Mead was tried and convicted for eleven counts of sexual exploitation of a minor after investigators learned that someone using his internet protocol address uploaded child pornography to a file-sharing application.  Mead challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, arguing the State failed to prove he was responsible for the uploads.  He also contends that none of the photos or videos at issue depict a “live performance” by a minor victim.  OPINION HOLDS: We find substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict on both of the elements challenged by Mead.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jackson County, The Honorable Stuart P. Werling, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (5 pages)

               Terry Vincent Kremer appeals his convictions for assault and false imprisonment after entering into a plea agreement. OPINION HOLDS: The sentencing court sentenced Kremer to the exact terms contained in his plea agreement. Because Kremer has failed to show good cause, we dismiss his appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (16 pages)

            Michael McCane appeals after a jury rejected his claims against his former employer for disability discrimination, failure to provide reasonable accommodation, and retaliation. McCane challenges the failure-to-accommodate marshaling instruction and the exclusion of certain evidence. OPINION HOLDS: The marshaling instruction did not misstate the law, adopt the defense’s theory of the case, or strip the jury of its fact-finding role. The district court did not abuse its discretion when it refused to admit the challenged evidence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (4 pages)

            Cody Dakin appeals the sentence imposed after pleading guilty to absence from custody.  He argues the district court abused its discretion by sentencing him to 164 days of incarceration and denied his request for probation.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a sentence of incarceration, we affirm the sentence.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Justin Lightfoot, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (21 pages)

            Stephen Keyes, convicted of two counts of murder in the first degree after the 1996 deaths of his wife and two-year-old child, appeals the district court’s order granting the State’s motion for summary judgment and the denial of his own motion for summary judgment in his second postconviction relief proceeding. Keyes asserts there exists newly discovered evidence showing actual innocence; the State failed to produce evidence when challenging Keyes’s motion for summary judgment; the district court misapplied the Brady rule in granting the State’s motion for summary judgment; a nexus exists between the newly discovered evidence and Keyes’s conviction, which satisfies the exception to the statute of limitations under Iowa Code section 822.3 (2022); and his counsel was ineffective at his underlying trial criminal trial and first postconviction relief proceeding. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Christopher Foy, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (19 pages)

               Aubin Reed appeals the district court’s judgment rejecting her undue-influence claim seeking to set aside a real-estate transfer from her deceased grandmother to Lisa Muchow-King—Reed’s aunt and the grandmother’s daughter, with whom the grandmother lived at the time of the transfer. Reed argues that district court erred in finding that Muchow-King rebutted the presumption of undue influence arising from the confidential relationship between Muchow-King and the grandmother. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, giving appropriate deference to the district court’s factual findings, we agree that Muchow-King met her burden to rebut the presumption of undue influence—she proved by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence that the grandmother acted freely, intelligently, and voluntarily in transferring the property and Muchow-King acted in good faith throughout the transaction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Stephen A. Owen, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Sandy, J., and Bower, S.J.  Opinion by Badding, P.J. (3 pages)

            Ryan Dunn appeals his convictions for possessing a controlled substance in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5) (2024) and unlawfully carrying a dangerous weapon in violation of Iowa Code section 724.8B.  He challenges the search of his backpack after his arrest and the facial constitutionality of section 724.8B.  OPINION HOLDS: Both of Dunn’s claims are controlled by our supreme court’s recent precedent.  A backpack worn by a defendant at the time of arrest is subject to warrantless search even after the defendant is restrained, and there is no constitutional right to carry a firearm while in the illegal possession of a controlled substance.  We affirm the rulings of the district court.

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

               Milton Bokemeyer appeals the sentence the district court imposed on him at resentencing for possession of methamphetamine, manufacturing marijuana while in possession of a firearm, and possession of a firearm by a felon.  Bokemeyer asserts the court abused its discretion by considering improper factors and reimposing a forty-five-year sentence.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding no abuse of discretion by the district court, we affirm. 

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Zachary Hindman, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (16 pages)

               Austyn Self appeals his conviction for murder in the first degree. He contends there was insufficient evidence for a conviction, that there was prosecutorial misconduct, and that newly discovered evidence requires a new trial. OPINION HOLDS: The State presented sufficient evidence, Self failed to preserve error on his claim of prosecutorial misconduct, and the district court did not abuse its discretion when denying Self’s motion for new trial. We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Thomas G. Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J.  (6 pages)

            Ryan Hahn challenges his conviction for fourth-degree theft. He argues the evidence was insufficient to establish he acted with the intent to deprive the owner of its property and the court erred by denying his right to an opening statement. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding of intent, and Hahn failed to preserve error on his claim that he was deprived of his procedural right to make an opening statement.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, The Honorable Michael Jacobsen, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Sandy, J. (6 pages)

               An applicant argues that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to warn him that he would be required to complete a sexual offender treatment program while incarcerated for him to be released on parole on unrelated charges. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Buena Vista County, The Honorable Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (5 pages)

            On interlocutory appeal, a hospital challenges the denial of motion for summary judgment based on lack of compliance with the certificate of merit statute. OPINION HOLDS: Bound by controlling precedent, we reverse and remand.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, The Honorable Angela L. Doyle, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (10 pages)

            David O’Brien appeals the economic terms of his dissolution decree challenging (1) the classification of his 401k in the property division, (2) the valuation of the parties’ business, and (3) the district court’s property division.  Additionally, Cori requests appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find the district court’s division of the parties’ retirement accounts was equitable, the business valuation was within the permissible range of the evidence, and the property division was equitable.  Accordingly, we affirm.  We also award Cori $7,500 in appellate attorney fees.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Jason D. Besler, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (22 pages)

              After a real estate purchase contract fell through, the buyer sought the return of her earnest money payment in a replevin action.  The buyer received a jury verdict in her favor and received an award of attorney fees.  The seller appeals, arguing: (1) earnest money is not the proper subject of a replevin action, (2) the district court improperly instructed the jury about Iowa’s replevin law, (3) the buyer failed to show that she had properly rescinded the contract, and (4) the buyer is not entitled to the attorney’s fees and costs awarded.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because the buyer’s earnest-money payment could properly be the subject of a replevin action, the district court did not err in instructing the jury, the buyer properly canceled the contract, and the district court did not err in its award of attorney fees and costs.  Consistent with this opinion, we order Davisson to pay Rosteck $20,000 in appellate fees and costs.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Lars G. Anderson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

               An applicant appeals the denial of postconviction relief on his conviction for lascivious acts with a child, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and actual innocence.  OPINION HOLDS: Because he failed to establish prejudice from any alleged ineffective assistance of counsel, and because he failed to meet the demanding standard to prove actual innocence, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Palo Alto County, The Honorable Shayne Mayer, Judge.  AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J. (6 pages)

            Jessy DeMoss appeals his convictions for three counts of second-degree sexual abuse and one count of lascivious acts with a child.  He argues the district court erred when it admitted one of the victim’s statements to a sexual abuse nurse examiner identifying him.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there was proper foundation to admit the victim’s identification of DeMoss as a statement of medical diagnosis, we find the district court did not err and affirm DeMoss’s convictions.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Patrick H. Tott, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (12 pages)

               John Willer appeals his conviction for possession of marijuana, third offense, following his conditional plea of guilty. First, he challenges the constitutionality of a peace officer’s order for him to exit the van in which he was a passenger. Second, he contends that his admission to possessing “a little weed” should have been suppressed. OPINION HOLDS: Under the Fourth Amendment, officers may—without reasonable suspicion—order passengers out of the car during an investigative stop. We decline Willer’s invitation to adopt a different standard under article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution. As to the admissibility of his statement, we find no Fifth Amendment violation because Willer was not in custody and his statement was voluntary. Thus, we affirm his conviction.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            Garry Mattix Jr. appeals the district court’s determination that he is personally liable for a delinquent account. OPINION HOLDS: As Mattix was a sole proprietor when he opened the account, and he never informed the seller that he created a limited liability company, he is personally liable on the account. One of his claims of improper modification of the credit agreement fails because it is not preserved, and the other fails because there was no modification of terms. His remaining claim fails because it is based on his contention that he was not a party to the credit agreement.

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

            Terrance Miller appeals the sentences imposed in two criminal cases involving three convictions and forty-five counts of contempt. The district court ran Miller’s sentences concurrently with one another, but—according to its written judgment—consecutive to a federal sentence Miller was serving when he committed his new offenses. Miller contends the district court erred in imposing a consecutive term. OPINION HOLDS: Finding no error, we affirm the sentences imposed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, The Honorable Jennifer Benson Barr, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (5 pages)

            Chad Allen Axtell, Sr. appeals his convictions for sexual abuse and indecent contact with a child.  He challenges the sufficiency of the argument by arguing the victims’ testimony was not credible.  OPINION HOLDS: Because Axtell’s convictions were supported by ample evidence we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Meghan Corbin, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (8 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals his discretionary sentence. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not err or abuse its discretion in disposing of a hybrid-hearing motion or when imposing sentence, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, The Honorable Thomas P. Murphy, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (23 pages)

               Jennifer Humphrey appeals the decree dissolving her marriage with Marc Humphrey. She argues that the district court should have placed the parties’ two minor children in their joint physical care rather than in Marc’s physical care. She also challenges the court’s property division, determination of Marc’s income, and decision to award a property equalization payment in lieu of spousal support. And she argues that the court abused its discretion in failing to award trial attorney fees and seeks an award of appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm. Giving appropriate deference to the district court’s factual findings—especially considering the parties’ high degree of conflict and difficulty in communicating and showing mutual respect—we agree that joint physical care is not in the best interests of the parties’ children. Although some of Jennifer’s challenges to the court’s identification and valuation of the marital property have merit, even accounting for those adjustments, the district court’s property division is equitable—indeed it substantially favors Jennifer. We agree with the court’s determination of Marc’s income. And given all the unique circumstances here—especially Marc’s comparatively advanced age—we also agree that the award of an equalization payment in lieu of spousal support is appropriate. As for attorney fees, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Jennifer’s request and we likewise decline to award appellate attorney fees.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Boone County, The Honorable John R. Flynn, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (8 pages)

               Three adult children appeal a summary judgment ruling dismissing their action to quiet title on land that passed through their mother’s estate.  OPINION HOLDS: Iowa Code section 633.487 (2023) bars their quiet title action, so we affirm the grant of summary judgment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable David Nelmark, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (5 pages)

            Luke Klonglan appeals his sentence following his guilty plea for possession of methamphetamine, third or subsequent offense. He argues that the district court considered an improper factor when it decided to run his sentence consecutively to a separate parole-revocation sentence from a different county. OPINION HOLDS: Klonglan cannot establish that the district court considered an improper factor when it sentenced him.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Lars G. Anderson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (7 pages)

            Robert Teig claims he is entitled to contribution from the City of Cedar Rapids for a fence he rebuilt that runs roughly parallel to the city street alongside his property. OPINION HOLDS: Due to the absence of a fence viewer decision to review, we affirm the district court’s decision that it did not have jurisdiction to award contribution.  We also affirm its denial of Teig’s alternative claims for contribution.  And we agree with the district court that Teig did not adequately raise his alternative request for a writ of mandamus.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cherokee County, The Honorable David C. Larson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (9 pages)

            A father appeals the private termination of his parental rights to three children.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father failed to maintain contact with and contribute financially to the children, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County, The Honorable Jessica Noll, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

               A juvenile appeals his adjudication of delinquency of having committed sexual abuse in the third degree in violation of Iowa code sections 709.1, 709.4(1)(a), and 903B.1 (2023). OPINION HOLDS: Because there is sufficient evidence to support his adjudication, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hardin County, The Honorable Kathryn E. Austin, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (5 pages)

               Stephen Littlepage appeals his sentences for assault while displaying a dangerous weapon and first-degree harassment, arguing that the district court considered unadmitted and unproven conduct discussed in the minutes of testimony. OPINION HOLDS: Littlepage has failed to meet his burden to show that the district court improperly considered unproven and unadmitted parts of the minutes of testimony rather than only facts he admitted to as part of his guilty plea. We thus affirm Littlepage’s sentences.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Duane E. Hoffmeyer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (6 pages)

               The defendant appeals her convictions for possession of a controlled substance and introduction of a controlled substance into a detention facility. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find substantial evidence that she possessed a baggie of methamphetamine while being booked into the Woodbury County jail, we affirm the convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (15 pages)

            Tyrus Meester appeals the physical care, visitation, and property division provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage with Kelsey Meester. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm the court’s decision to place the parties’ child in Kelsey’s physical care, and we decline to modify the visitation schedule. We also affirm the court’s refusal to offset Kelsey’s student loan payments in its property division.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable David M. Porter, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (5 pages)

               Trel Peterson appeals the district court’s sentencing order. He argues the district court abused its discretion by failing to duly consider mitigating factors and declining to offer him probation. OPINION HOLDS: The district court adequately considered mitigating factors and did not abuse its discretion.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, The Honorable Myron L. Gookin, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (19 pages)

               Two members of a family farm corporation appeal from the district court’s finding of no minority shareholder oppression and no breach of fiduciary duty. As to their minority shareholder oppression claim, they argue the district court improperly applied the reasonable expectations test and the business judgment rule. OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court properly analyzed their reasonable expectations, and the business judgment rule applies in this case. Because we agree there was no minority shareholder oppression and no breach of fiduciary duty, we affirm.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Paul D. Scott, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (6 pages)

               A defendant appeals his sentence imposed following his guilty plea. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because the district court exercised appropriate discretion.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, The Honorable Crystal S. Cronk, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (9 pages)

               Tony Dassan appeals from the district court’s ruling granting defendants DJP Holdings, LLC and Sudha Maharaj’s motion for summary judgment. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Iowa County, The Honorable Lars G. Anderson, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (14 pages)

            A claimant appeals from the decisions of the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commissioner and district court regarding the claimant’s workplace injury, alleging the commissioner’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and in error due to the use of statutorily prohibited agency discretion and judicial notice.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, The Honorable Roger L. Sailer, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (5 pages)

            Jeremy Batiste appeals the sentence imposed after pleading guilty to interference with official acts while armed with a firearm and marijuana possession.  He argues the district court abused its discretion by denying his request for a deferred judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court considered proper sentencing factors in fashioning its sentence, we find there was no abuse of discretion and affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Steven J. Andreasen, Judge. SENTENCE VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (4 pages)

            A criminal defendant argues that extending a no-contact order on resentencing exceeded the scope of remand. OPINION HOLDS: Concluding all action other than resentencing the defendant on the fine exceeded the scope of the remand, we vacate in part and remand for entry of a corrected order in which the no-contact order runs from the date of the original judgment.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, The Honorable Terry Rickers, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard at oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J.  (13 pages)

            Greg Merrigan and Brenda Merrigan appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment.  They argue the district court erred when it (1) excluded witnesses and evidence as a discovery sanction and for lack of expert designation, (2) granted a mistrial and entered an order reaffirming all prior evidentiary rulings for the second trial as law of the case, and (3) granted summary judgment.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the discovery sanctions and trial management are within the district court’s inherent authority and summary judgment is appropriate in the absence of expert testimony, we affirm the district court in its entirety.

              Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Jason D. Besler, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (22 pages)

              After a real estate purchase contract fell through, the buyer sought the return of her earnest money payment in a replevin action.  The buyer received a jury verdict in her favor and received an award of attorney fees.  The seller appeals, arguing: (1) earnest money is not the proper subject of a replevin action, (2) the district court improperly instructed the jury about Iowa’s replevin law, (3) the buyer failed to show that she had properly rescinded the contract, and (4) the buyer is not entitled to the attorney’s fees and costs awarded.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm because the buyer’s earnest-money payment could properly be the subject of a replevin action, the district court did not err in instructing the jury, the buyer properly canceled the contract, and the district court did not err in its award of attorney fees and costs.  Consistent with this opinion, we order Davisson to pay Rosteck $20,000 in appellate fees and costs.

               Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Gregory D. Brandt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (3 pages)

               Dana Breese appeals his sentence for assault with intent to commit sexual abuse, arguing that the district court should have imposed a deferred judgment rather than a two-year indeterminate prison sentence. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court did not abuse its considerable sentencing discretion in selecting the prison sentence, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, The Honorable Elizabeth O’Donnell, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (7 pages)

            Defendant appeals his convictions following a jury trial for operating while intoxicated, third offense, and driving while barred, alleging the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a mistrial based on a tainted jury pool, culminating in a constitutional violation. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the defendant’s convictions.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Thomas A. Bitter, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ.  Opinion by Chicchelly, J.  (8 pages)

            N.W. appeals a district court order finding she is seriously mentally impaired and involuntarily committed her for treatment.  On appeal she argues the district court erred in finding she was likely to (1) physically injure herself and (2) inflict serious emotional injury on members of her family.  OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the district court’s finding that N.W. is likely to physically injure the person’s self or others if allowed to remain at liberty without treatment, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Ashley Stewart, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (2 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals the revocation of his deferred judgment and resulting prison sentence. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Robert J. Richter, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (6 pages)

            Defendant appeals his sentence for the convictions of driving while barred and eluding, asserting the district court abused its discretion by relying on an improper sentencing factor and utilizing a fixed sentencing scheme. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Daniel L. Block, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (9 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights. The mother challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination and requests additional time to work towards reunification.  The father challenges the statutory grounds and whether termination is in the child’s best interests.  He also requests additional time to work towards reunification. OPINION HOLDS: The statutory grounds authorizing termination of both parents’ respective rights are satisfied.  Termination of the father’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  We decline to grant either parent additional time to work towards reunification. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, The Honorable Patrick J. McAvan, Judge. AFFIRMED ON ALL APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (10 pages)

            A mother and two fathers—one biological and one legal—appeal the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights to their two daughters.  The mother and legal father challenge the court’s findings that the girls could not be returned to their custody at the time of the termination hearing and that termination was in the children’s best interests.  All three parents contend that the juvenile court erred by declining to grant additional time for reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court that the girls could not be returned to the mother or legal father at the time of the hearing and that termination was in their best interests.  Given the parents’ lack of progress, we also find no error in the court’s denial of additional time for reunification.  We therefore affirm the juvenile court’s order on all appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Finding a ground for termination is established, additional time is unwarranted, termination is in the children’s best interests, and no exception to termination applies, we affirm.