Zachary Paul Huber v. Iowa District Court for Polk County
20-0639
| Iowa Ct. App. | Oct 6, 2021Background
- In 2015 Huber was convicted of domestic abuse assault; the trial court imposed a five-year no-contact order preventing contact with his former spouse and prohibiting firearms/ammunition.
- The no-contact order did not change his divorce decree visitation rights; Huber did not seek to exercise visitation while the order was in effect.
- Huber possessed ammunition during the order, in violation of its terms.
- Before the order expired the State sought a five-year extension under Iowa Code § 664A.8; Huber resisted and a hearing was held.
- The district court found Huber lacked credibility (noting his implausible motive for ending the order and his ammunition possession), relied on the nature of the assault that led to conviction, and concluded he failed to prove by a preponderance he no longer posed a threat; it extended the order.
- On appeal the supreme court treated Huber’s notice as a petition for certiorari; this court annulled the writ (i.e., denied relief) and upheld the extension.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by considering Huber’s motives for seeking termination of the order | Huber: the court should not consider his motives or the order’s impact on him | State: motive is relevant to credibility and can be considered | Court: considering motive to assess credibility was proper |
| Whether the court improperly considered events surrounding conviction (juror misconduct / acquitted charges) | Huber: court relied on juror misconduct and charges of which he was acquitted | State: court did not rely on acquitted charges or juror misconduct; it considered the underlying act that produced the conviction | Court: did not consider juror misconduct or acquitted charges; considering the act leading to conviction was permissible |
| Whether Huber met his burden to prove he no longer poses a threat | Huber: he satisfied the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard | State: evidence (credibility concerns, ammunition possession, protected party’s fear) shows risk remains | Court: Huber failed to meet his burden; extension affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Vance v. Iowa Dist. Ct., 907 N.W.2d 473 (Iowa 2018) (explains defendant’s burden to prove no continuing threat and that courts need not consider defendant’s interests)
- Claus v. Whyle, 526 N.W.2d 519 (Iowa 1994) (trial court is best positioned to resolve credibility questions)