2020 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Jennifer A. Benson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (12 pages)

            A mother appeals termination of her parental rights to the children in this private termination proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree the ground of abandonment was established by clear and convincing evidence and termination is the children’s best interest.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, Andrew Smith, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (10 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the juvenile court denying the mother’s request for withdrawal and replacement of her attorney, we agree with the juvenile court’s three-step analysis finding termination appropriate, and we deny the mother’s request for additional time to work toward reunification. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Virginia Cobb, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (4 pages)

            A father and mother separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to two children.  The father contends the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court and termination was not in the children’s best interests.  The mother contends she should have been granted a six-month extension to regain custody of the children.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the parents’ parental rights to the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children.  OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence establishes the ground for termination under section 232.116(1)(f) (2020) given the mother’s unresolved substance-use issues.  The evidence also shows termination is in the children’s best interests and terminating the mother’s parental rights would not be detrimental to the children.  We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mark C. Cord III, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and May and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: The juvenile court was correct in finding statutory grounds for termination satisfied and termination to be in the child’s best interest.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, Jennifer A. Benson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (9 pages)

            Jessica and Tony appeal the termination of their parental rights to three children.  Tony contends the court abused its discretion in denying his motion to continue the termination trial.  Jessica contends the State failed to prove the statutory grounds, the Department of Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify the family, and giving her more time for reunification was in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We find no abuse of discretion in the court denying the motion to continue.  The State proved the statutory ground for termination under one of the four grounds the juvenile court found and proved it made reasonable efforts to reunify the family.  Jessica’s substance-abuse issues substantially impaired her ability to respond adequately to the offered services.  Finally, because of her ongoing substance-abuse impairment, an extension of the time for reunification would not have been in the children’s best interests.  We affirm as to both appeals. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to L.W., her infant child.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s order terminating the mother’s parental rights under section 232.116(1)(h) (2020).  An additional six months will not resolve the need for removal from parental care.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Monroe County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.  Considered by May, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (7 pages)

The State filed a petition alleging eight-year-old N.C. is a child in need of assistance (CINA), pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(b), (d), and (p) (2020), which the juvenile court dismissed following a hearing.  On appeal, the State and the child’s guardian ad litem challenge the juvenile court’s conclusions that there is not clear and convincing evidence N.C. was sexually abused by father or is imminently likely to be sexually abused by him.  The State also maintains there is clear and convincing evidence to find the father physically abused or neglected N.C. or is imminently likely to abuse or neglect her.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the juvenile court’s dismissal of the CINA petition as to section 232.2(6)(b) and (p).  Because we determine N.C. is a child in need of assistance pursuant to section 232.2(6)(d), we reverse the court’s dismissal of the petition under that ground. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Linda L. Fangman, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Doyle, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (7 pages)

            Markus Harding appeals from his convictions of first-degree burglary, domestic abuse assault while using or displaying a dangerous weapon, false imprisonment, and fourth-degree theft.  Harding contends the district court erred in applying the “forfeiture by wrongdoing” exception to the Confrontation Clause to allow admission of hearsay statements made by the victim.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeanie K. Vaudt, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (4 pages)

            Thanh Dao appeals from the dismissal of his fourth application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the summary dismissal of Dao’s postconviction-relief application.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Tama County, Patrick R. Grady, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Ahlers, J., and Carr, S.J.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (4 pages)

            Vincent Duncan appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: Because he failed to establish his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Colleen Weiland, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and May, JJ.  Opinion by May, J.  (9 pages)

            Warren Purvis appeals from the dismissal of his application for postconviction relief following his convictions of sexual abuse in the first degree, willful injury resulting in serious injury, and domestic abuse assault impeding breathing or circulation of blood causing bodily injury.  OPINION HOLDS: Purvis has failed to prove that trial counsel failed to perform an essential duty or that Purvis suffered constitutional prejudice because (1) counsel did not obtain the services of an expert and (2) counsel declined to strike a juror who knew the victim.