State of Iowa v. Jamal Jordan Bowser

── State of Iowa v. Jamal Jordan Bowser ── Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa Date: April 29, 2026 Category: General IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA _______________ No. 25-1019 Filed April 29, 2026 _______________ State of Iowa, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Jamal Jordan Bowser, Defendant–Appellant. _______________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable John C. Nelson, Judge. _______________ AFFIRMED _______________ Pamela Wingert of Wingert Law Office, Spirit Lake, attorney for appellant. Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Zachary Miller, Assistant Attorney General, attorneys for appellee. _______________ Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Telleen, S.J. Opinion by Langholz, J. 1 LANGHOLZ, Judge. Jamal Bowser appeals his conviction for indecent exposure by masturbation. See Iowa Code § 709.9(2)(a) (2025). Although two witnesses observed him holding his erect and exposed penis in his hand while standing on a street corner—and one of them also said “it looked like he was playing with it”—he argues there was insufficient evidence to prove that he was stimulating his “genitals . . . for the purpose of sexual gratification or arousal.” Id. § 709.9(2)(c). Because this was substantial evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Bowser was masturbating in public in violation of the statute, we affirm his conviction for indecent exposure by masturbation. The court heard evidence that one March 2025 evening, two women each leaving their separate workplaces saw Bowser on a street corner in Sioux City. The first “locked eyes” with him as she was walking and he made some motion “kind of, like, nudged down,” and when she “looked down, he was holding his penis in his hand. And—and as he was holding it, it was erect.” She “tried to get away as fast as [she] could,” and called 911 when she got to her car. Because she left so quickly, she “was unsure” if Bowser “was doing this for pleasure” and only knew “he was holding it. It was in his hand.” The second woman was waiting at a stoplight while Bowser was beside her. She saw another woman “looking at his direction” who “seemed pretty upset.” So she also “looked in his direction just to—out of curiosity” and saw Bowser staring at her. “He had his penis out and it looked like he was playing with it.” She agreed that “it appeared that he was masturbating” and “[l]ike he was pleasuring himself.” She also agreed with the other woman that “Bowser’s penis was erect.” And she acknowledged that when she first talked to the police, she had said she was “unsure” if he was masturbating. 2  Bowser was charged with indecent exposure by masturbation in violation of Iowa Code section 709.9(2)(a). He waived his right to a jury trial. And at a bench trial, the court heard testimony from the two women and three other witnesses called by the State, and it received exhibits—including the 911 call made by the first woman. The court found both eyewitnesses to be “especially” credible and summed up its ultimate findings: The court has no reasonable doubt. The court is convinced that [Bowser] exposed his penis to both of the women, that he was aroused (erect), and that he was touching himself for the purpose of gratification. [Bowser’s] actions constitute “masturbation” as contemplated by the Code of Iowa. The motions for a directed verdict/judgment of acquittal are denied. The Defendant is found guilty of the crime of