Opinion
No. 1-853 / 01-0465.
Filed January 9, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, BOBBI M. ALPERS, Judge, and JOHN G. MULLEN, District Associate Judge.
D.M. appeals a juvenile court decision finding he committed the delinquent act of criminal mischief in the fourth degree. AFFIRMED.
Kyle D.Williamson, Davenport, for appellant minor child.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, M. Elise Pippin, Assistant Attorney General, and William Davis, County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Considered by HUITINK, P.J., and ZIMMER and VAITHESWARAN, JJ.
D.M. appeals a juvenile court decision finding he committed the delinquent act of criminal mischief in the fourth degree. D.M. was charged with this offense for intentionally causing greater than $100, but not more than $500, damage to an antique tractor displayed at a Machine Shed restaurant. On appeal, he claims the State presented insufficient evidence of the requisite intent element of this offense to support his adjudication as a delinquent child.
Our review is de novo. In re S.C.S., 454 N.W.2d 810, 814 (Iowa 1990). Weight should be given to the fact-findings of the juvenile court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but the reviewing court is not bound by them. In re J.D.F., 553 N.W.2d 585, 587 (Iowa 1996).
We find the record contains proof beyond a reasonable doubt that D.M. intended to damage the tractor. See Iowa Code § 232.47(10) (1999); In re S.C.S., 454 N.W.2d at 814 (State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that juvenile engaged in delinquent act). Machine Shed employees testified they saw D.M. sitting on the tractor violently pulling and pushing on the tractor's gearshift while two other children were seen pulling on something in the engine area and pushing on a rear tire. Upon subsequent inspection, Machine Shed employees found the gearshift, gearbox, distributor cap, rotor cap, and hoses lying on the ground next to the tractor and observed D.M. and the others leaving the restaurant property. We find these circumstances give rise to the inference that D.M. acted with the intent to cause damage. See State v. Finnel, 515 N.W.2d 41, 42 (Iowa 1994) (element of intent seldom susceptible to proof by direct evidence, but depends on inferences drawn from circumstantial evidence); State v. Howard, 404 N.W.2d 196, 198 (Iowa Ct.App. 1987) ("The fact finder may determine intent by such reasonable inferences and deductions as may be drawn from facts proved by evidence in accordance with common experiences and observation.").
We affirm the decision of the district court finding D.M. committed the delinquent act of criminal mischief in the fourth degree.
AFFIRMED.