October 2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (9 pages)

            The father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his daughter, M.M., born in 2014.  The father asserts (1) the court erred in terminating his parental rights, (2) the State failed to make reasonable efforts to unify him with M.M., (3) he should have been allowed an additional six months with reasonable efforts afforded to show he could resume custody and care of M.M, and (4) it is not in the best interests of M.M. to terminate the father’s parental rights because of their close bond.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the father was provided reasonable efforts in working toward reunifying with M.M., termination is in M.M.’s best interests, and an additional six months toward reunification is not warranted.  Thus, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (8 pages)

            Following termination of parental rights, the State appeals from the juvenile court’s order removing the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) as the child’s guardian and custodian and appointing the child’s foster parents to serve as guardians and custodians.  OPINION HOLDS: We treat the foster parents’ post-termination filings as a request to remove and replace a guardian.  The DHS’s decisions with regard to the child were within its discretion as guardian and custodian.  Therefore, the juvenile court’s order removing the DHS must be reversed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Greer, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three of her children, G.H., born in 2010; S.A., born in 2013; and F.B., born in 2018.  The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (G.H. and S.A.), (h) (F.B.), and (l) (all three children) (2020).  She maintains the court was wrong to find the children could not be returned to her care at the time of the termination hearing or, in the alternative, maintains that an additional period of time would correct the situation and allow for reunification.  OPINION HOLDS: Insofar as the mother preserved a claim the children could be returned at the time of the termination hearing, we find they could not be safely returned.  And, relying only on the record properly before us, we cannot say another six months would allow them to safely return to her care.  We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to these three children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Rose Anne Mefford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Greer, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (5 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children N.L and E.B., born in 2018 and 2019 respectively.  The juvenile court terminated her rights pursuant to section 232.116(1)(h) and (l) (2020).  The mother does not contest that these statutory grounds have been met.  She argues the juvenile court should have established a guardianship in her brother in lieu of termination and maintains that permanency option is in the children’s best interests in part because of the strong bond the children share with her.  OPINION HOLDS: Because termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests, we cannot establish a guardianship in lieu of termination.  We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (8 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court order terminating his parental rights to two children.  He argues the State failed to offer clear and convincing evidence to establish a statutory ground for termination.  He also argues termination is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the father showed little to no progress in addressing his severe mental-health and substance-abuse issues, we find clear and convincing that the children could not be safely returned to his care.  We also conclude termination is in the children’s best interests because the father remained unemployed and had unstable housing at the time of the termination hearing.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jefferson County, William S. Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (11 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child, K.A.  The juvenile court terminated both parents’ parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (f) (2020).  Both parents assert on appeal (1) additional time should have been granted to work toward reunification pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(b) and (2) termination of parental rights is not in the child’s best interests.  The mother also asserts (1) the statutory grounds for termination were not met because the child could have been returned to her care at the time of the termination hearing and (2) the juvenile court erred by denying the mother’s request to continue the termination hearing to a time when the hearing could be held in person rather than by videoconference.  Finally, the father asserts a guardianship for the child should have been established as a less-restrictive alternative to termination of parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is no persuasive indication that the need for K.A.’s removal will no longer exist following the requested extension and because K.A. needs permanency now, additional time for reunification is not warranted.  Because the mother does not dispute the juvenile court’s finding that the State has met its burden pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e), she has waived any challenge to the statutory grounds and we need not address this issue on appeal.  We agree with the juvenile court that termination is in K.A.’s best interest and that guardianship is not in K.A.’s best interest.  Given the present circumstances and record before us, the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motions to continue and holding the termination hearing by videoconference.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin Parker, District Associate Judge.  APPEAL DISMISSED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Danilson, S.J.  Opinion by Danilson, S.J.  (2 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court decision denying the State’s petition to terminate the mother’s parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the father did not have standing to bring an appeal on the matter, and we dismiss the appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (7 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their respective parental rights to their child, O.P., born in July 2017.  The juvenile court terminated each parent’s rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2020).  On appeal, the mother maintains the State failed to prove the statutory ground for termination, the loss of her rights is not in the child’s best interests, and two exceptions to termination are applicable and should preclude termination.  Alternatively, she asks for a six-month extension to work on reunification.  The father echoes the mother’s claims and also challenges the court’s March 2020 permanency order, claiming the court should have delayed permanency and given him a six-month extension rather than ordering the termination-of-parental-rights petition to be filed.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of each parent’s rights to O.P.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The State established statutory grounds authorizing termination.  Termination is in the child’s best interest, and we do not apply any permissive exception to termination.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals from a juvenile court order terminating parental rights to her son, arguing the State failed to prove grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence, termination is not in the child’s best interest, and provisions of Iowa Code section 232.116(3) (2020) should be applied to avoid termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports the grounds for termination, termination is in the children’s best interests, and the State engaged in reasonable efforts to reunify the family.  We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Scott, S.J.  Opinion by Scott, S.J.  (4 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.