*1 great- judgment guilty of enter may further shall The court alleged crime. the only. of the offenses copy er inspect and to allow the defendant statements, documents, books, papers, that a sentence is To the extent objects tangible which or photographs void, objection required for this an is not custody or control possession, within the Austin, v. grant to relief. State court state, to the are material and which the of 1993). judgment The N.W.2d defense, or are or her preparation of his charge, which was conviction on the OWI of evidence by the state as for use intended offenses, void, higher merged in the trial, or obtained from the or were at necessary the defen therefore not it was belong to the defendant. challenge it in the district court. to dant added.) (Emphasis of homicide vehicle The convictions hospital records had not been affirmed, and injury by vehicle are serious “seized,” “pos they in the State’s nor were intoxicated operating of while the conviction session, could custody control.” The State or the case to the dis- vacated. We remand without unilaterally procure them Stalk- not entry an order accor- trict court for of Gabrielson, 464 State v. fleet’s waiver. See dance with this 1990). Only patient PART, IN AFFIRMED IN VACATED may privilege; prosecutor may the waive PART, REMANDED. AND Randle, him, State v. not waive it for App.1992), and we that, equally ac evidence is have held when State, the the to the defendant and

cessible required produce to it. See State is not State 725, 729 Galloway, 187 N.W.2d

1971) (court produce order state to refused to equally that were

tapes polygraph of tests defendant). accessible to Claimant, VOSBERG, Terrance D. Appellant, denying mo- the court did not err medical records. produce tion MANUFACTURING A.Y. McDONALD Conviction.

II. OWI CO., Employer, Appellee. court should complains that Stratton charge judgment on the No. 92-1527. not have entered that intoxicated because operating while Iowa. Appeals Court merged in offenses of homi- offense was injury by motor by motor vehicle and cide April vehicle. merger ar- does not refute

The State only the defendant

gument; it contends preserve error on this issue because

failed to objected only imposi- sentencing to the on the OWI any additional sentence

tion of entry object to the

charge and did not

judgment. (1991) provides: 701.9

Iowa Code section public convicted of a person

No shall be necessarily included which is

offense person public offense of which

another jury a verdict If the returns

is convicted. one offense and such guilty of more than section, the court conflicts with this

verdict *2 Kenline, Reynolds

Mark J. Sullivan of & Dubuque, appellant. for Thomas, Les V. Reddick of O’Connor & P.C., Dubuque, appellee. DONIELSON, Judge. Chief began working Terrance D. first an for A.Y. McDonald October 1978 as entry in the level mechanic. served Navy through from 1979 1982 where he was systems an electrical maintainer. stint, Navy Vosberg returned to after his Vosberg eventually employer’s not the decision but mandated A.Y. McDonald. Therefore, millwright earning rather the union contract. promoted position to a as per hour. approximately concluded that Industrial Commissioner Vos- $10.45 berg’s was not increased Vosberg injured January his back rehire. employer’s refusal See repairing machine while *3 Co., McSpadden v. Big Ben Coal 288 N.W.2d pounds. 100 weighing approximately Vos- (Iowa 1980). 181 The Industrial Commis- berg sought medical attention. immediate Vosberg proved sioner concluded entitlement Faber, pre- Dr. company physician, The thirty-five disability percent to physical therapy. Dr. scribed medicine and benefits. eventually Vosberg Dr. Faber referred to performed by Dr. Cairns. A bone scan judicial Vosberg petition for filed a review. Vosberg sustained a Cairns revealed The district the decision court affirmed of the in herniated disc his lower back. Dr. Cairns The district Industrial Commissioner. court surgery was not warranted and determined supported concluded substantial evidence the prescribed treatment. Dr. conservative Industrial Commissioner’s determination of placed Vosberg’s em- Cairns restrictions healing period benefits and industrial disabil- Vosberg ployment opined sustained a ten and ity benefits. body percent impairment to his as a whole Vosberg appeals. the We reverse district injury. No because of the back further review court’s of the Industrial Commission- prescribed. treatment has been this case to er’s decision and remand the Vosberg to unable to return work with was proceed- further Industrial Commissioner for company A.Y. The re- McDonald. asserts ings consistent with this prohibit contract it strictions in its union In its review of the Industrial Com rehiring Vosberg position. in another from court missioner’s the district func at The contract was not entered evidence capacity in an to correct appellate tions er Deputy hearing the the before Industrial 17A.19(8) (1993). § law. rors of Iowa Code currently Vosberg Commissioner. is self- the district Section 17A.19 circumscribes Amway employed selling selling and and in- review court’s to a determination whether systems. stalling satellite television agency any spec errors of law the committed Vosberg original peti- notice filed an 17A.19(8). King City ified subsection of with seek- tion the Industrial Commissioner Pleasant, 564, 565 Mt. 474 N.W.2d ing compensation benefits. At the workers’ 1991). agency’s findings The of fact have the hearing, Vosberg time of the arbitration was jury broadly of a and are to be effect verdict thirty years Following hearing, a a old. liberally agency the applied uphold to Deputy pro- Industrial Commissioner filed Id.; Brundige, decision. Beier Glass Co. deputy posed agency The conclud- decision. 1983). 280, The dis 282 sixty per- to Vosberg proved ed entitlement gives of trict court careful consideration depu- cent benefits. The law, of but is not conclusions Commissioner’s ty found sustained substantial loss College v. Cam bound them. Briar Cliff injury. In of income a result of his back as 1984). 91, polo, 360 N.W.2d addition, deputy Vosberg proved found reverse, grant modify, or court district must healing period entitlement to benefits from agency appropriate from action other relief 22, 8, January September to 1989. Iowa of law. Code affected errors appealed. The A.Y. McDonald Industrial 17A.19(8)(e). § Vosberg’s had found condition Commissioner dis We review the decision improvement further was not stabilized and pursuant section court to Iowa Code expected November 1989. There- trict after fore, the standards section apply 17A.20. We the Industrial Commissioner concluded 17A.19(8) to determine agency to the- action Vosberg proved healing period entitlement to same as the our are the January 1989 to whether conclusions benefits from November at If King, 474 N.W.2d district court’s. 1989. The Industrial Commissioner found same, we affirm the conclusions are the employer’s to rehire our refusal not, they 30-pound If we reverse. law is claimant has “a re- district court. agency Transp., striction.” The also found: Dep’t Henry v. Iowa 1988). 17A.19(8) re- hope Section Claimant’s is that since he is unable rights peti- jobs requiring physi- “if of the quires relief substantial to work doing prejudiced.” agency cal work he was at the time of his tioner have been injury, Amway his work his business with may not be: action hopefully money can him much earn as as constitutional or statuto- a. In violation of employer. earned defendant This is ry provisions; highly goal, obviously but motivated statutory authority b. excess reaching the record he is it far from agency; at this time and it will take considerable rule; agency In violation of an c. undersigned going is not effort. *4 procedure; upon d. Made unlawful speculate as to whether claimant will law; by added.) e. Affected other errors of goal. (Emphasis reach that case, unsupported by a f. contested gross Amway The 1990 income from and evidence in the record made Vosberg’s August substantial satellite dish business as of $3,000 agency $4,000 when that record is Amway before the from 1990 was whole; selling Vosberg or viewed as satellite dishes. was working fifty weekly Amway, trying hours Unreasonable, g. arbitrary capricious or longer to build the he no business because by an abuse of discretion or characterized was able to install the satellite dishes be- clearly or a unwarranted exercise of dis- court, injury. cause of his The district in cretion. contrast, Vosberg “expects found to make as 17A.19(8). § Iowa Evidence is sub- Code earnings in much or more as he did at A.Y. person if it stantial a reasonable would find though McDonald.” Even the district court reaching adequate Peoples a decision. by agency’s findings states it is bound if Hosp. Rights v. Iowa Memorial Civil they supported substantial evidence in Comm’n., 87, 1982); 322 N.W.2d 91 record, we conclude the district court Serv., Dep’t Eaton v. Iowa Job 376 N.W.2d agency’s findings in- reviewed the de novo 915, App.1985). question 917 is stead of for correction of errors of law as might support the evidence not whether 17A.19(8); specified by § statute. Iowa Code finding different but whether the evidence King, 474 see N.W.2d 565. findings actually Henry supports the made. duty We have a to correct the dis Serv., 731, Dep’t 391 v. Iowa Job County trict court’s errors law. Jackson (Iowa App.1986). The fact that two in- Hosp. Employment Pub. v. Public Relations can consistent conclusions be drawn from the (Iowa 1979). Bd., 426, We not mean that one of evidence does those apply the standards of Iowa Code section unsupported by conclusions is substantial evi- 17A.19(8) agency to the decision to determine dence. Id. whether our conclusions are the same as the Deputy Industrial Commissioner They district court. are not. We conclude findings in made extensive of fact his deci thirty- determination suffered a adopted Industrial Commissioner sion. The percent disability unsupport five is findings those without modification as final ed substantial evidence in the record as a court, agency The district in action. its re experience whole. His education and make agency’s view the made its own him injury suited for manual labor. His agen findings which do not with the coincide completely prevents engáging him from cy’s findings agency details. The in several employment for which he is best is never to lift over 10 found “claimant A.Y. suited. McDonald will not rehire him in pounds.” agreed nonlabor, Dr. Cairns “testified supervisory managerial capaci or The district court ty. [with restriction].” striving Amway is to build his weight Dr. “limited Claimant’s likely years found Cairns business. It will be several be generate to somewhere between 20 and 30 fore he compara is able to income pounds.” earning injury. court’s conclusion of ble to what The district he was before the comparable may able to have He never be the district court

earnings. We conclude ANNE In the Matter of the HAMILTON of the Industrial Commis- erred its review TRUST, KILLIAN for Benefit of Joan the decision of and reverse sioner’s decision HUNTER, al., Killian et Dated March affirming agency. the district court 1959. Henry, 426 N.W.2d at 385. HUNTER, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, Todd In next review the conclusions We College, Briar dustrial Commissioner. Cliff v. liberally policy to at 92. “Our 360 N.W.2d ROSSIE, Trustee of the Anne J. Richard compensation statutes construe workers’ Trust, Hamilton Killian for Benefit of favor of the worker.” Mortimer Fruehauf 1993) Hunter, al., (quot Killian et Dated March Corp., Joan 502 N.W.2d 4, 1959, Brundige, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. ing 329 N.W.2d Beier Glass Co. 1983)). determiné, for the We No. 93-114. discussed, Commis reasons the Industrial thirty- Vosberg suffered a sioner’s conclusion Appeals Court of of Iowa. arbi percent

five May unsupported by evi trary and substantial Deputy Industrial Commissioner dence. *5 sixty percent

concluded suffered disability. This determination application of on the evidence and

based provide Vos-

existing law. The award would

berg he would have earned with about what millwright. The Industri years as a three Commissioner, depu review of the

al his

ty’s determined suffered disability.

thirty-five percent The Commis activity Vosberg’s concluded work

sioner injury jobs. His

limited to manual labor engaging

prevents him from

employment. then stat The Commissioner

ed, factors of on these and all other “Based disability, has an industri claimant percent.” plain state

al of 35 appropriate factors were consid

ment provide us with the basis for

ered does not We conclude

the Commissioner’s decision. disability rating sixty to change in arbitrary. We there

thirty-five percent was the Industrial Com remand this case to

fore proceedings consistent for further

missioner

with this AND REMANDED.

REVERSED SACKETT, J., except Judges

All concur

who dissents.

SACKETT, (dissenting). Judge, I would affirm.'

I dissent.