Court Opinion

ID: 9389932
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-26 16:04:34.134912+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:30.587620
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

                                   No. 22-0934
                               Filed April 26, 2023

STATE OF IOWA,
     Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

ELIJAH SAMUEL PAULSON,
     Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________

      Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dickinson County, Don E. Courtney,

Judge.

      Elijah Paulson appeals his convictions for second-degree sexual abuse,

lascivious acts with a child, and child endangerment. AFFIRMED.

      Jack Bjornstad of Jack Bjornstad Law Office, Spirit Lake, for appellant.

      Brenna Bird, Attorney General, Sheryl Soich, Assistant Attorney General,

and Kelly Lynch, Student Legal Intern, for appellee.

      Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Badding, J., and Doyle, S.J.*

      *Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206

(2023).
                                        2

DOYLE, Senior Judge.

       Elijah Paulson appeals his convictions for second-degree sexual abuse,

lascivious acts with a child, and child endangerment. He challenges the sufficiency

of the evidence supporting his convictions. Because substantial evidence supports

his convictions when viewed in the light most favorable to upholding the verdicts,

we affirm.

       I. Background Facts and Proceedings.

       The State charged Paulson with eight crimes following allegations that he

sexually abused two young family members. Those allegations surfaced in August

2020, when the mother of three-year-old A. found A. with Paulson inside his locked

bedroom. Paulson did not respond to her knocking at first, so A.’s mother began

to pound on the door. When the door eventually opened, A. was standing by

Paulson’s bed. Her pants were crooked, and she looked afraid. Paulson, who

was holding a package of wet wipes, put his arms up “in a surrender mode.”

       A.’s mother took A. upstairs and asked if she was okay. A. said, “Eli wanted

to play a game. He rubbed his pee pee”1 and pointed to her vagina. When other

family members were asked if Paulson had ever touched them, nine-year-old T.

revealed that Paulson had sexual contact with her. Law enforcement was notified

about the children’s allegations.

       During the law enforcement investigation, T. recounted multiple instances

of sexual abuse by Paulson that occurred over time.         She recalled Paulson

1Although Paulson argues there is no evidence that A. knows what a “pee pee” is,
we agree with the State that it is a term often used by young children to describe
genitals.
                                        3

showing her pornographic videos, which Paulson told her to keep secret. She also

recalled Paulson rewarding her with candy or ice cream for performing sex acts on

him. T. also drew pictures of many sex toys that Paulson had and described how

they were used. After securing a search warrant, law enforcement recovered items

in Paulson’s bedroom that matched the sex toys T. depicted and described. They

also discovered that Paulson removed a My Little Pony collection2 from his room

and erased one of his computer’s hard drives after the incident with A.

      Paulson denied wrongdoing. He admitted touching A.’s genitals but claimed

he only did so because A. complained, “There is a knife in my butt.” Paulson said

he removed her pants to look for irritation. When he saw what he believed to be

evidence of a yeast infection, he used an aloe vera wet wipe to clean her.

      When asked why he locked A. inside his bedroom, Paulson claimed he did

so by accident. He explained that he shares his home with his parents and

routinely locks the door for privacy when he is in his room. Paulson said A. went

2  Paulson, who was thirty-seven years old at trial, is a fan of My Little Pony:
Friendship Is Magic, an animated television series based on the Hasbro toy
franchise. Although created to appeal to young girls, Paulson explained, “There is
a surprising fan base of men my age ranging anywhere from [twenty-five] to [thirty-
five].” He described the series as his “audiovisual antidepressant” and explained
its appeal to those outside the target demographic:
        The pastel colors they use are incredibly calming and relaxing. The
        musical numbers—they use a lot of this, I found out, was literally
        designed to make you happier and calm. The show is literally
        designed to draw people in. It happened to have a big influence on
        middle-aged adults who were depressed and needed something to
        cling onto to make themselves, well, a little bit less depressed.
As a result of his interest in the series, Paulson owns My Little Pony collectible
toys, which he allowed the children to play with. Paulson testified that after the
first search warrant, he “became very depressed” by anything that directly
reminded him of the accusations against him. The My Little Ponies collectibles
reminded him of the accusations because he played with the collectibles with the
children, so Paulson put them in storage.
                                           4

into his room without his knowledge when he went to attend to his parents’ dogs.

On returning, he locked his door out of habit. Paulson then discovered A. seated

at his desk chair, watching a pornographic video that Paulson did not realize was

open on his computer. To distract her from what she had seen, Paulson said he

moved A. to his bed and gave her My Little Pony toys to play with.

       Paulson denied he had child pornography on his computer or that he erased

his hard drive to destroy evidence. He claimed that before this incident, he planned

to erase the backup hard drive from his computer to replace the failing hard drive

in his mother’s computer. On that day, Paulson was readying the drive when A.

complained of pain.

       Finally, Paulson tried to explain his failure to answer immediately when A.’s

mother knocked on his door. He claimed that he used headphones to listen to an

audiobook and take a call from his brother. The headphones prevented him from

hearing when A.’s mother knocked. It was not until she began pounding on the

door that Paulson heard and opened the door. He explained that he looked

surprised because the noise startled him. Because A.’s mother looked angry, he

claimed he put his hands up in a placating gesture and tried to tell her that there

was no reason to be mad.

       A bench trial was held after Paulson waived his right to a jury trial. T.

testified at trial, but A. could not.3 The trial court found Paulson guilty on two counts

3 Two attempts to depose A., then four years old, failed because the court reporter
found her too young to place under oath. A., who was scared, stated that she
could never come to the courtroom and tell the truth.
                                          5

of second-degree sexual abuse, lascivious acts with a child based on touching,4

and child endangerment—one count related to A. and one related to T. Paulson

appeals the three convictions related to A.

       II. Sufficiency of the Evidence.

       Paulson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his

convictions on the three charges related to A. We review the sufficiency of the

evidence for correction of errors at law. See State v. Lacey, 968 N.W.2d 792, 800

(Iowa 2021). We apply the same standard in reviewing a claim of insufficient

evidence in a bench trial as we do in a jury trial. See State v. Myers, 924 N.W.2d

823, 826 (Iowa 2019). We are “highly deferential” to the verdict and affirm if it is

supported by substantial evidence. Lacey, 968 N.W.2d at 800. Evidence is

substantial if it may convince a rational person of the defendant’s guilt beyond a

reasonable doubt. Id. In making this determination, we view the evidence and all

reasonable inferences that can be drawn from it in the light most favorable to the

State. Id. The question is whether the evidence supports the finding the court

made, not whether it would support a different finding. See id.

       Paulson contends the evidence of his guilt related to A. “is next-to-non-

existent and merely raises suspicion, speculation, and conjecture.” A. did not

testify at trial, and the trial court ruled her videotaped interviews with the Child

Advocacy Center were inadmissible. The evidence presented about the incident

4It found Paulson not guilty on two counts of lascivious acts with a child based on
solicitation.
                                         6

with A. was largely limited to the testimony of A.’s mother and Paulson.5 From that

evidence, the trial court was presented with two versions of events: the State’s and

Paulson’s.

       The State’s version of events, which is supported by the testimony of A.’s

mother, is straightforward: Paulson locked A. in his bedroom, exposed her to

pornography, removed her pants, and touched her genitals for his own arousal

before A.’s mother interrupted.

       Paulson’s version of events is less so.        He presents a remarkable

occurrence of events that casts suspicion over what was, ultimately, an innocent

interaction.   In his version, Paulson returns home from work and enters the

passcode to unlock his computer, which—unbeknownst to him—has a

pornographic video on the screen. Before he notices the pornography, Paulson

must leave the room to deal with his parents’ dogs. While he is out, three-year-old

A. slips inside undetected and climbs into Paulson’s desk chair, where she begins

5 A.’s grandfather, who was in the room when A.’s mother brought her upstairs
from Paulson’s room, also testified. He did not recall A. saying anything specific
about Paulson:
               Q. What happened when [A.] came up while you were
        standing there and your wife is there with her mom? A. They were
        talking, and all of a sudden she said something about a penis, and
        then everything went crazy.
               Q. There is some statement in the record about Eli wanted to
        play a game. He put his penis in this area, something like that. Was
        anything like that said? A. No.
               Q. How do you know? A. Well, if I recall right, I think she said
        she saw. That was it. She saw a penis.
Although his testimony was not definite, it conflicts with that of A.’s mother, who
testified A. said Paulson “rubbed his pee pee.” But whether A. stated she saw a
penis based on the pornography rather than seeing Paulson’s penis, Paulson
admits that he touched A.’s genitals with his hands. The State did not need to
show he touched her genitals with his penis so long as the contact was sexual.
                                            7

watching the video on the screen. Paulson returns to his room and locks his door,

as is his habit, before noticing A. He finds her sitting in front of his computer

watching pornography and removes her from the computer. Rather than removing

her from the room, Paulson sits A. on his bed and gives her ponies to play with in

hopes she will forget what she saw on his computer. After he returns to the

computer “to clean out [his] web browser so that wouldn’t happen again,” A.

complains about her genitals hurting. In response, Paulson removes her pants to

find the cause of her pain.6 He sees what he thinks is evidence of a yeast infection

and cleans the area with an aloe vera wet wipe.7 He then returns to his computer

to erase the backup hard drive, which he planned to use as a replacement for his

mother’s hard drive. As he worked on the computer, Paulson listened to an

       6   Paulson explained why he—a single, childless man—felt comfortable
personally investigating a three-year-old girl’s complaint of genital pain when her
mother and grandmother were in the house:
        Well, I used to live with another brother. I was live-in baby-sitter for
        over a year with my brother . . . . So I took care of an infant, a four-
        year-old and a six-year-old. I think that’s the ages. But I was used
        to it.
                ....
                And I was used to taking care of all kinds of child-related
        issues. So she says it hurts. You check real quick and see if there
        is an irritation. Maybe I go tell Mom or I go tell her grandmother that
        she has a rash and she needs some medication for it or something,
        you know, instead of just throwing her out and say I don’t care, go
        talk to grandma.
7 Paulson testified that he found “some sort of . . . white little pustules. I don’t know

what they were.” Although he has never seen a yeast infection, he testified that
he believed A. had a yeast infection based on things he had heard his sisters say
in his presence. He then explained, “First thing for any of these things that I know
of is you keep the area clean. So I had these wipes, aloe vera wipes that I use on
myself. . . . I used the wipes to clean up the little white things, little kernels, little—
I don’t know.” A.’s mother testified that A. has never had a yeast infection, and no
evidence of a yeast infection was discovered after the incident.
                                         8

audiobook and took a phone call on his headphones.            The sound from the

headphones causes the delay in him answering his door when A.’s mother arrives.

       The State provides the more plausible version. The events described by

Paulson appear reverse-engineered to explain the known facts. Arguably, one or

more of those events could occur in isolation. But the credibility of his explanation

diminishes with each event added to the chain. Taken as a whole, it is a bridge

too far. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, substantial

evidence supports the finding of guilt. We affirm.

       AFFIRMED.