Full Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA _______________ No. 25-1469 Filed November 4, 2026 _______________ State of Iowa, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Shane Michael Power, Defendant–Appellant. _______________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Casey D. Jones, Judge. _______________ AFFIRMED _______________ William Monroe, Burlington, attorney for appellant. Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Tessa Register, Assistant Attorney General, attorneys for appellee. _______________ Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Schumacher and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. 1 BULLER, Judge. Shane Power appeals his conviction for driving while barred, an aggravated misdemeanor. See Iowa Code §§ 321.560, .561 (2024). We review for correction of errors at law. State v. Lang, 30 N.W.3d 757, 762 (Iowa Ct. App. 2025) (en banc). The crime of driving while barred has two elements: the defendant was (1) driving and (2) barred from driving because his license was suspended. State v. Williams, 910 N.W.2d 586, 593–94 (Iowa 2018). Video played at trial showed Power driving, and certified records proved Power’s license was “barred” at that time. This alone requires us to affirm under the applicable standard of review. Power argues the deputy’s testimony was so unbelievable we should reverse his conviction. But, as our recent en banc decisions have made clear, we do not ordinarily substitute our credibility judgment for that of the fact- finder. See Lang, 30 N.W.3d at 766; State v. Hernandez, 20 N.W.3d 502, 507–08 (Iowa Ct. App. 2025) (en banc). To the extent any authority persists allowing us to decide sufficiency questions based on credibility, we decline. We observe Power’s brief contains an assortment of quotes from religious texts, fables, and more. None of these establish reversible error. We also reject Power’s argument that a different standard should apply to crimes based on whether they are malum in se or malum prohibitum.1 He cites no authority supporting that claim, and we know of none. AFFIRMED. 1 For a dry explanation of the difference between malum in se (evil in it itself ) and malum prohibitum (prohibited evil), see Black’s Law Dictionary (12th ed. 2024). For a discussion of the topic in a fictional law school classroom, see Legally Blonde, DVD, at 35:00–37:00 (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures 2001). 2