Opinion
No. 4-369 / 03-1972.
July 14, 2004.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Richard D. Morr, Judge.
Defendant appeals a protective order following an adjudication of domestic abuse. AFFIRMED.
Andrew Howie of Hudson, Mallaney Shindler, P.C., West Des Moines, for appellant.
Gordana Kantarevic, Des Moines, appellee pro se.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Hecht and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Admir Kantarevic appeals the district court's entry of a protective order, under Iowa Code chapter 236 (2003), which found he engaged in domestic abuse of his wife, Gordana. Admir argues there was insufficient evidence to support the court's finding. Because the trial was held in equity, our review is de novo. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; Knight v. Knight, 525 N.W.2d 841, 843 (Iowa 1994) (stating that the scope of review is in accordance with the mode of trial). Although not bound by the district court's factual findings, we give them considerable weight, especially when assessing the credibility of witnesses. Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(6)( g).
At trial, Gordana testified through an interpreter that the couple argued about Admir's alleged adultery and Admir struck her in the face or head sending her to the floor. Three days later she left the home and did not return. Gordana also testified that her husband severely beat her two years prior to this incident and had a medical report from Mercy Clinic, though not with her. Admir testified they did argue but he did not strike her nor has he ever done so. He claims she concocted this story because of jealousy. When Gordana did not return home, Admir filed a missing person report and looked for her. Gordana did not contact her family for three days. Their daughter, Nadia, testified that she was present during the argument and did not see Admir strike Gordana and has never seen any violence in the home.
After hearing testimony from Gordana, Admir, and their daughter, the district court concluded,
The Court in resolving these issues raised in these Petitions must make a determination of credibility. That means, who does the Court believe? In this particular case, the Court believes the plaintiff.
The elements of this cause of action are there has to be a domestic relationship as defined by Chapter 236. The relationship has been established. These people were married at the time of the assault. The Court — the plaintiff — must further prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant physically abused the plaintiff. The Court finds that the plaintiff is the most credible on this issue. The Court finds that the defendant did physically assault the plaintiff. Domestic abuse has been established.
Admir asserts Gordana's testimony was vague and faults the district court for not setting forth "whether Gordana satisfied any of the elements of assault as defined by Iowa Code section 708.1 (2003). Instead, the Court based its ruling on who it believed."
We disagree. Gordana described how Admir beat and threw her to the floor. She also answered pointed questions in the affirmative that Admir had struck her in the face with his fist which caused her pain. First of all, because the district court had the opportunity to directly observe witness demeanor, we defer to its credibility assessment. See In re Marriage of Forbes, 570 N.W.2d 757, 759 (Iowa 1997). We couple those credibility findings with our de novo review of the record and agree with the district court there was sufficient evidence presented to support a finding of domestic abuse.