Opinion
No. 3-327 / 02-1445
Filed June 13, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monroe County, William S. Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A juvenile appeals from an order adjudicating him delinquent for committing three counts of second-degree sexual abuse. AFFIRMED.
James Mefferd of James Mefferd, P.C., Chariton, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert Bozwell, County Attorney, for appellee.
Robert Conrad, Knoxville, for amicus curiae parents.
Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Hecht and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Z.J.C., a juvenile, appeals from an order adjudicating him delinquent for committing three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree. He contends the State failed to prove the alleged sexual abuse occurred in Iowa as required under Iowa Code section 803.1(1)(a) (2001). His parents seek to raise other issues in an amicus curiae brief. We affirm the juvenile court.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
In June 2001, Monroe County Deputy Sheriff Paul Resczenko received a Department of Human Services (DHS) report indicating seven-year-old Christy, and her eight-year-old twin brothers, Timmy and Tommy, had been sexually abused by their fifteen-year-old uncle, Z.J.C. Resczenko obtained a videotape of an interview of the three victims. He viewed the tape and then called Z.J.C.'s mother to set up an interview with Z.J.C.
Z.J.C. went to the Monroe County Law Center to be interviewed. Resczenko informed Z.J.C. of his rights as a juvenile and obtained his waiver. Z.J.C.'s mother also gave her consent for an interview. During the interview, Z.J.C. admitted he had inserted a pencil into the rectums of Timmy and Tommy, but generally denied inappropriate contact with Christy. He also denied ever touching the boys' penises.
Z.J.C.'s version of the events differed in some respects from the accounts given by his victims. According to Christy, Z.J.C. placed his hand on her vagina over her underwear and also put a pencil down the back of her pants outside of her underwear. Christy also saw Z.J.C. pull her brothers' pants down and touch them inappropriately. According to Timmy, his uncle touched his penis after pulling down his pants. Timmy and Tommy claimed Z.J.C. inserted a pencil into their rectums.
The State filed a delinquency petition charging Z.J.C with three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree in violation of Iowa Code section 709.3. Z.J.C. filed a motion to suppress the statements he made when he was interviewed. The motion was overruled. An adjudicatory hearing was held in April 2002. The three victims testified at the hearing and their prior depositions were received as part of the record. At the close of the State's evidence, Z.J.C. moved for directed verdict arguing the State had failed to prove the delinquent acts occurred in Iowa. The court denied the motion. The court concluded Z.J.C. was delinquent for committing three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree. Z.J.C. appeals.
II. Discussion.
Z.J.C. does not contest the juvenile court's finding that he committed acts of sexual abuse. On appeal, he contends the State failed to prove the acts alleged in the petition occurred in Iowa as required under Iowa Code section 803.1(1)(a).
When an action is tried before a court without a jury, a motion for directed verdict should actually be designated as a motion to dismiss. Iowa Coal Min. Co., Inc. v. Monroe County, 555 N.W.2d 418, 438 (Iowa 1996) (citing B B Asphalt Co. v. T.S. McShane Co., 242 N.W.2d 279, 281 (Iowa 1976)). However, this misnomer is immaterial as a motion to dismiss during trial is equivalent to a motion for directed verdict. Id. Our scope of review is for the correction of errors at law. Iowa R.App.P. 6.4. When reviewing a ruling on a motion to dismiss, we apply the same principles as the trial court. In re T.J., 474 N.W.2d 562, 563 (Iowa 1991). We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party to determine whether reasonable minds could differ on the issue. If reasonable minds could differ, the issue is for the fact finder. Pearson v. Ossian, 420 N.W.2d 493, 495 (Iowa Ct.App. 1988).
Iowa Code section 232.8(1) gives the juvenile court "exclusive original jurisdiction in proceedings concerning a child who is alleged to have committed a delinquent act. . . ." Iowa Code section 232.2(12)(a) defines a delinquent act as a "violation of any state law . . . which would constitute a public offense if committed by an adult. . . ." By inference, then, Iowa Code section 803.1(1)(a), the law governing jurisdiction of criminal actions, applies. That section provides, in pertinent part:
A person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense which the person commits within or outside this state, by the person's own conduct . . ., if:
a.The offense is committed either wholly or partly within this state.
Here the delinquency petition alleges that all of the elements of the delinquent acts occurred in Monroe County, Iowa. Pursuant to Iowa Code section 803.1(1)(a), the State was required to prove the acts occurred in Iowa.
All of the victims agreed that the abuse occurred in Z.J.C.'s parents' house. Timmy testified that he lived in Lovilia. In his deposition, he stated that Z.J.C. lived out in the country, outside of Lovilia. Christy testified that Z.J.C. "live[d] nearby where [she] live[d]." Her deposition reveals that she lived in Lovilia and that Z.J.C. lived "out in the country," "kinda" close to Lovilia. Tommy did not testify where he or Z.J.C. lived; however, Tommy did indicate in his deposition that he lived in Lovilia, Iowa. He also indicated that Z.J.C. lived "in the country," by Lovilia, and "a little bit" close to where he lived with his parents. Viewing the record before us in the light most favorable to the State, we conclude the State offered substantial evidence to prove that the alleged delinquent acts occurred within the state of Iowa. See State v. Liggins, 524 N.W.2d 181, 184-86 (Iowa 1994); see also In re T.J., 474 N.W.2d at 563. Accordingly, we affirm the juvenile court.
In In re T.J., 474 N.W.2d at 563, our supreme court held testimony that alleged the victim lived one house away from the accused, evidence indicating the victim and accused attended the same school, and evidence of the street address of the accused was not sufficient to establish jurisdiction under section 803.1(1)(a) because the record failed to reveal that the landmarks mentioned were in the state of Iowa.
III. Amicus Curiae Brief.
Z.J.C.'s parents have filed an amicus curiae brief which raises a number of issues not addressed in the their child's brief. We decline to address them. Issues raised on appeal must be argued in the briefs of the parties litigating the case. Board of Directors v. Mroz, 295 N.W.2d 447, 450 (Iowa 1980). Reviewable issues must be presented in the parties' briefs, not an amicus brief.
With one exception, it also appears the parents are making arguments on appeal that were not made to the juvenile court. We do not consider claims on appeal which have not been preserved for our review. The parents' argument that the evidence is insufficient to support the juvenile court's delinquency adjudication is without merit.
Martin v. Peoples Mutual Savings Loan Ass'n, 319 N.W.2d 220, 230 (Iowa 1982).