State of Iowa v. Dean M. Porter Jr. ( 2016 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 16-0328
Filed December 21, 2016
STATE OF IOWA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
DEAN M. PORTER JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Henry W. Latham II,
Judge.
Dean Porter Jr. challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his
convictions for first-degree robbery and assault while participating in a felony.
AFFIRMED.
Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Shellie L. Knipfer, Assistant
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Thomas E. Bakke, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee State.
Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Doyle and McDonald, JJ.
2
DANILSON, Chief Judge.
Dean Porter Jr. challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his
convictions for first-degree robbery and assault while participating in a felony.
We review claims of insufficient evidence for correction of errors at
law. State v. Robinson, 859 N.W.2d 464, 467 (Iowa 2015). “A guilty verdict must
be supported by substantial evidence.” State v. Serrato, 787 N.W.2d 462, 465
(Iowa 2010). In our review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a
judgment for conviction, we are required to “view the ‘evidence in the light most
favorable to the State, including legitimate inferences and presumptions that may
fairly and reasonabl[y] be deduced from the record evidence.’” State v. Dewitt,
811 N.W.2d 460, 477 (Iowa 2012) (citation omitted). We are mindful that
“credibility determinations are an essential function of the fact finder.” Id. at 476.
Here, following a bench trial, the trial court entered its detailed findings of
fact and conclusions of law, specifically finding the victim’s testimony credible
and supported by the other evidence at trial. The court specifically stated it “did
not find the testimony offered by Mr. Porter credible at all.” Upon or review of the
record, we find substantial evidence supports the court’s findings and
conclusions—additional discussion would be of little value. See Iowa Ct. R.
21.26(1)(b), (d), (e). We affirm.
AFFIRMED.