Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1767
View Summary for Case No. 18-1767
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Vogel, P.J. (8 pages)
The father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to S.W., born in July 2015. The father argues the State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that grounds for termination exist under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2018). Both argue the district court should have granted a six-month extension and should have found termination was not in S.W.’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: We find the State proved by clear and convincing evidence the grounds for termination of the father’s parental rights. Additionally, we find an additional six months would not extinguish the need for removal. Finally, termination is in S.W.’s best interests and any bond between the parents and child does not preclude termination.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1769
View Summary for Case No. 18-1769
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. (4 pages)
A mother appeals from a decision terminating her parental rights to her minor child, contending (1) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court, (2) termination was not in the child’s best interests, and (3) her rights should not have been terminated given the closeness of the parent-child bond. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to the child.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1770
View Summary for Case No. 18-1770
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Lynn Poschner, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Vogel, P.J. (5 pages)
The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights. The parents both argue the State has not established the grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence, termination is not in the best interests of the child, and the district court should have granted an extension of time. OPINION HOLDS: We find grounds for termination have been proved, termination is in the best interests of the child, and an extension of time would not have extinguished the need for removal. We therefore affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1771
View Summary for Case No. 18-1771
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, David F. Staudt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Potterfield, J. (7 pages)
The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to D.M.—born in October 2016—pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) and (h) (2018). On appeal, the mother maintains there is not clear and convincing evidence to support the statutory grounds for termination and termination of her parental rights is not in D.M.’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: The mother’s reengagement with services shortly before the termination hearing is insufficient to demonstrate she is willing and able to work toward correcting the situation, and we cannot say that any additional time would enable the mother to achieve a different result. Thus, there is clear and convincing evidence to support termination of the mother’s parental rights under section 232.116(1)(g). Because termination of the mother’s parental rights is also in D.M.’s best interests, we affirm.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1796
View Summary for Case No. 18-1796
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Doyle, J. (4 pages)
A mother challenges the reasonable efforts made by the State to reunite her with her children prior to termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Visitation would not have remedied the mother’s parenting deficiencies and would have been contrary to the children’s best interests.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1801
View Summary for Case No. 18-1801
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, P.J. (6 pages)
A mother appeals, challenging the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to a one-year-old child. She contends the State did not prove the statutory grounds for termination and termination is not in the child’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: After independently reviewing the record, we find clear and convincing evidence to support termination of the mother’s parental rights. We further find termination of parental rights to be in the child’s best interests.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1804
View Summary for Case No. 18-1804
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Vaitheswaran, J. (6 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children, contending (A) the department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite her with the children; (B) termination is not in the children’s best interests; (C) she should have been afforded an additional six months to work toward reunification; and (D) the district court should not have terminated her parental rights because the children were placed with relatives. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review of the record, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to the children.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1807
View Summary for Case No. 18-1807
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (7 pages)
A father and a mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their two children, Ja.B., born in August 2012, and Jo.B., born in February 2016. OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court abused its discretion in failing to continue the permanency and termination hearing in light of the parents’ absence and nonrepresentation by counsel. We reverse the termination of parental rights.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1851
View Summary for Case No. 18-1851
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Potterfield, J. (6 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. The mother argues the district court improperly denied her motion for recusal and the State failed to make reasonable efforts at reunification. OPINION HOLDS: We find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mother’s motion for recusal. The mother has not preserved her reasonable-efforts argument.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1862
View Summary for Case No. 18-1862
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Potterfield, J. (4 pages)
The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her one-year-old child, K.G. The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) and (h) (2018). On appeal, she argues there is not clear and convincing evidence to support the statutory grounds for termination and termination is not in the child’s best interests because of the close bond the mother and K.G. share. OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports the termination of the mother’s parental rights pursuant to section 232.116(1)(h), termination is in the child’s best interests, and no permissive factor weighs against termination. We affirm.
Filed Dec 19, 2018
View Opinion No. 18-1889
View Summary for Case No. 18-1889
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Angela L. Doyle, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Potterfield and Doyle, JJ. Opinion by Doyle, J. (6 pages)
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child. OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence establishes the grounds for termination of the father’s parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) (2018). Because termination, rather than delaying permanency an additional six months, is in the child’s best interests, we affirm.
Filed Dec 05, 2018
View Opinion No. 17-1015
View Summary for Case No. 17-1015
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, George L. Stigler, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Tabor, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. (11 pages)
Jacque Dukes appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief (PCR). He asserts trial counsel was ineffective (1) in failing to challenge the guilty verdicts for first-degree robbery and willful injury and the applicable jury instructions based on joint criminal conduct, (2) in failing to challenge the jury instructions on assault and the corroboration necessary to convict on accomplice testimony, (3) in introducing Dukes’s criminal history, and (4) in failing to strike a juror who was related by marriage to the prosecutor. OPINION HOLDS: Because Dukes failed to prove trial counsel breached an essential duty resulting in prejudice, we affirm.