2021 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Mark Kruse, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            S.G. appeals from the district court’s order finding her to be seriously mentally impaired and requiring placement at a residential care facility.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the continuing inpatient hospitalization order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Phillip J. Tabor, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by May, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Tabor, J., takes no part.  Opinion by May, P.J.  (9 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights in a private termination proceeding.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude termination was proper under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3) (2020) and consistent with the child’s best interest.  So we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Tom Reidel, Judge.  AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Mullins, J., and Gamble, S.J.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (7 pages)

            Andre Horton appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the denial of Horton’s application, but we remand the matter to the district court to enter an order reducing the criminal penalty surcharge in proportion to the suspended fine.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, Judge.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (7 pages)

            Jeffery Mau appeals from the district court’s ruling on the entry of the parties’ qualified domestic relations order (QDRO).  OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the district court’s ruling and remand with instructions to approve the proposed QDRO.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel L. Block, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (3 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is no basis for finding the need for the child’s removal will be eliminated if permanency is delayed an additional six months, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  Special concurrence by Tabor, J. (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights, contending termination was not in the children’s best interests, the district court should have declined to terminate her parental rights based on the parent-child bonds, and the court should have held separate permanency hearings and termination of parental rights hearings.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the district court’s termination of the mother’s parental rights to the four children that are a subject of this appeal.  SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur with the majority in affirming the order terminating the mother’s parental rights.  But I write separately to emphasize the importance of juvenile courts reaching particular written findings for both permanency and termination of parental rights when opting to hold a combined hearing.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, William Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Doyle, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (9 pages)

            The mother and father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their three children, born in 2010, 2012, and 2018.  The mother concedes the statutory grounds for termination were met but argues termination of her rights is not in the children’s best interests so the court should have established a guardianship in the paternal grandmother in lieu of termination.  The father challenges the statutory grounds or, in alternative, maintains he should have been given more time to work toward reunification.  He also maintains termination of his rights is not in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we affirm the termination of both parents’ parental rights. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Doyle, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Greer, J.  (14 pages)

            The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her three children, K.A.-C, M.A., and K.A.  OPINION HOLDS: We find the State provided clear and convincing evidence of grounds for termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (h) (2020), as the children could not be returned to the mother’s care at the time of the termination hearing.  We also conclude termination is in the children’s best interests and decline to apply a permissive exception to termination.  We affirm the district court order terminating the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel L. Block, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (6 pages)

            A mother, Nichole, appeals the termination of her parental rights to her one-year-old daughter, N.M.  Nichole contends the State did not offer clear and convincing proof to support the grounds for termination.  In the alternative, she asks to defer permanency for six months.  She also argues the juvenile court should have denied the State’s petition to terminate based on her close bond with her daughter.  OPINION HOLDS: We find ample evidence to support termination under section Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) (2020).  Nichole’s inability or unwillingness to respond to services prevents us from delaying permanency.  Finally, her close relationship with her daughter does not compel a different result.  We affirm the juvenile court. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Osceola County, David C. Larson, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (11 pages)

            A mother and a father separately appeal the termination of their parental rights.  OPINION HOLDS: Because there is clear and convincing evidence the child cannot be returned to either parent at present, termination was proper under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2020).  We reject the parents’ claims that reasonable efforts of reunification were not made.  Moreover, an extension of time to seek reunification is not warranted here, termination is in the child’s best interests, and no permissive exception weighs against termination.  We therefore affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Romonda Belcher, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Greer, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, contending the State failed to prove the ground for termination cited by the juvenile court, the court should have granted additional time to work toward reunification, and the court should have applied statutory exceptions under Iowa Code section 232.116(3) (2020) to preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Stephanie Forker Parry, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals an order adjudicating his children in need of assistance.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the adjudication on the four grounds cited by the district court.