Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Sahir

Court of Appeals of Iowa

January 10, 2018

STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
NASSER MUHAMED SAHIR, Defendant-Appellant.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.

         The defendant appeals his convictions for sexual abuse in the third degree and assault with intent to commit sexual abuse. AFFIRMED.

          Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Bradley M. Bender, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

          Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Thomas E. Bakke, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

          Considered by Potterfield, P.J., McDonald, J., and Blane, S.J. [*]

          BLANE, Senior Judge.

         Nasser Sahir was convicted of third-degree sexual abuse and assault with the intent to commit sexual abuse. On appeal, Sahir argues the convictions were contrary to the weight of the evidence and his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to convict him and for failing to adequately assert evidentiary challenges at trial.

         I. Background Facts and Proceedings

         In 2012, T.O.C. (born 1996) was living with her mother and Sahir. One evening, Sahir came into T.O.C.'s bedroom while she was in bed and told her "there's things [she] can do to make [herself] feel better so [she's] not so mad and so [she doesn't] go have sex." Sahir put his hand on her, put his hand into her pants, and penetrated her vagina with his fingers, "moving them in a circle inside of [her] vagina." On Father's Day, a similar incident occurred, although Sahir's hand was above T.O.C.'s clothing.

         Shortly thereafter, T.O.C. went to stay with her mother's sister in California for the summer. The relative observed Sahir made frequent late night phone calls to T.O.C. while she was in California. The relative asked T.O.C. if Sahir abused her, and, after an initial denial, T.O.C. said Sahir had abused her. Soon thereafter, the relative and T.O.C. returned to Iowa. T.O.C.'s mother questioned her about the allegation against Sahir. T.O.C. was not allowed to return home. She first went to live with her grandmother and was then placed in foster care. In August 2012, T.O.C. gave an interview with a child protection center about the abuse.

         In July 2013, Sahir was charged with sexual abuse in the third degree, a class "C" felony, in violation of Iowa Code section 709.4 (2011); and assault with the intent to commit sexual abuse, an aggravated misdemeanor, in violation of section 709.11. Sahir pleaded not guilty. Throughout the proceedings, Sahir wholly denied the allegations made against him. He stated the incident on Father's Day could not have happened because he had a severe toothache that day. He also argued the allegations against him only surfaced once he and T.O.C.'s mother threatened to send T.O.C. to Mexico as punishment for her behavior.

         Sahir went to trial and was ultimately found guilty as charged by a jury. Sahir filed a motion for new trial on the following grounds: (1) the verdict returned was contrary to the law and evidence in several respects; (2) the court erred in granting the State's motion to amend the trial information, which prejudiced Sahir; and (3) the district court erred in ruling on several evidentiary issues at trial. The trial judge denied the motion and sentenced Sahir to concurrent sentences of ten years and two years in prison, along with fines, a lifetime special sentence pursuant to section 903B.1, a sex offender treatment program, and registration as a sex offender. Sahir now appeals.

         II. Weight of the Evidence

         We review rulings on motions for new trial for abuse of discretion. See State v. Nitcher, 720 N.W.2d 547, 559 (Iowa 2006). Trial courts have wide discretion in ruling on motions for new trial. See Iowa R. App. P. 6.904(3)(c). A court only abuses its discretion in denying a motion for new trial when "the evidence ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.