STATE v. MOSSET (2025)

Christopher Mosset appeals his conviction for driving while barred and contends the district court abused its discretion at sentencing. Substantial evidence supports the conviction. And Mosset offers no basis for his claim that the court abused its sentencing discretion. So we affirm by memorandum opinion.

On March 2, 2023, a deputy sheriff ran Mosset's vehicle plate, which had an expired registration sticker.¹ He discovered that Mosset's license was barred. He charged Mosset under Iowa Code section 321.561 (2023). At a bench trial, Mosset testified he had a temporary restricted license that allowed him to drive while working. But the district court found “[n]o credible evidence” supporting Mosset's explanation that he was working when stopped. On our review of this record including the trial testimony, the certified abstract of driving record, the restricted license conditions, and the dashboard camera footage of the vehicle stop, we find substantial evidence supports the court's fact findings.

Mosset also contends the district court abused its discretion at sentencing. But he does not identify any aspect of the sentence or the court's exercise of its discretion as deficient, so we consider that claim waived. See Iowa R. App. P. 6.903(2)(a)(8)(3). Because we find sufficient evidence to convict, and a full opinion will not augment or clarify the applicable caselaw, we affirm by memorandum opinion. See Iowa R. App. P. 21.26(1)(b), (e).

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The deputy ticketed Mosset for the expired registration, but the State later dismissed that charge.

TABOR, Chief Judge.