2021 Archive | Court of Appeals Court Opinions

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Deborah Farmer Minot, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the juvenile court order terminating their parental rights to their minor children. On appeal, the mother and father each separately argue (1) the juvenile court erred by not granting additional time to work towards reunification and (2) the juvenile court erred by not declining to terminate the parents’ rights under section 232.116(3)(c) due to the closeness of the parents’ relationship with the children.  OPINION HOLDS: Based on their performance in the fifteen months since the children were originally removed, there is no indication that the reasons for removal will no longer exist after an additional six months.  As such, an extension is not warranted.  We decline to apply section 232.116(3)(c) to avoid terminating the parents’ parental rights.  We affirm on both appeals.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Susan Cox, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS.  Considered by Bower, C.J., Schumacher, J., and Potterfield, S.J.  Opinion by Potterfield, S.J.  (12 pages)

            D.A., the teenaged child of the mother and father, was removed from the parents’ care in December 2019.  The father filed a motion to modify the dispositional order, asking the court to end D.A.’s out-of-home placement and return her to the family home.  The juvenile court denied the motion, which the parents separately appeal.  They assert there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances and circumstances in Iowa Code section 232.103(4) (2019) exist so modification of the dispositional order is appropriate.  They also contend returning D.A. to their care is in her best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The purpose of the dispositional order has not been accomplished and the family’s circumstances have not so materially and substantially changed that the best interests of D.A. require she be returned to her parents’ care.  We also cannot find by a preponderance of the evidence that D.A. will not suffer adjudicatory harm if she is returned.  For these reasons, we agree with the juvenile court’s denial of the motion to modify the dispositional order and the continued out-of-home placement of D.A. from the parents’ care.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Union County, Monty Franklin, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), (e), (f), (k), and (l) (2020).  She contends termination of her parental rights is not in the children’s best interests, a permissive factor exists to avoid termination, and there is insufficient evidence to support termination under paragraphs “k” and “l.”  OPINION HOLDS: Discerning no reason to reverse the juvenile court’s ruling, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Associate Juvenile Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Tabor, J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two daughters.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the mother has not meaningfully addressed her mental-health issues and alcohol addiction for over a year, we find termination is in the children’s best interests.  Finding no exceptions preclude termination, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Rachael E. Seymour, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor children.  The mother does not challenge the sufficiency of evidence supporting the grounds for termination.  Instead, she contends termination is not in the children’s best interests, the juvenile court should have invoked an exception to termination, and a guardianship would be appropriate.  OPINION HOLDS: Because we agree termination is in the children’s best interests and no permissive factor precludes termination, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Christopher Kemp, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Ahlers, J.  (11 pages)

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

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marion County, Steven Guiter, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Ahlers, JJ.  Opinion by Vaitheswaran, P.J.  (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.  She contends (1) the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court; (2) the district court should have afforded her additional time to work toward reunification; (3) termination was not in the child’s best interests; and (4) the district court should have invoked an exception to termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to the child.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Steven J. Holwerda, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Mullins, J.  (7 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination and arguing termination is contrary to the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, Steven J. Holwerda, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Mahan, S.J.  Opinion by Mahan, S.J.  (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child, born in 2014.  He contends the State failed to prove the grounds for termination cited by the juvenile court and the juvenile court should have applied the statutory exception under Iowa Code section 232.116(3)(c) (2020) to preclude termination.  OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the decision of the juvenile court to terminate the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Carrie K. Bryner, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.  Considered by Mullins, P.J., Greer, J., and Vogel, S.J.  Opinion by Vogel, S.J.  (6 pages)

            A father of two children appeals the adjudication of the children as in need of assistance.  OPINION HOLDS: Because of the father’s ongoing substance-abuse issues, we affirm adjudication under Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2) and (p) (2020).  But, because the State failed to show the children have already received inadequate care as a result of his substance abuse, we reverse adjudication under section 232.2(6)(n).

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Webster County, Joseph B. McCarville, District Associate Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.  Opinion by Doyle, J.  (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to her minor child.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the State presented sufficient evidence to support termination of the mother’s parental rights and that termination is in the best interests of the child.  We reject the mother’s reasonable–efforts argument and her request for more time.  We therefore affirm termination of her parental rights to K.W.-A.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, William P. Kelly, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Considered by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Greer, JJ.  Opinion by Bower, C.J.  (23 pages)

            Shawn Davis appeals from his conviction for second-degree murder, contending the jury instructions were erroneous, his trial counsel was ineffective, and the court’s evidentiary rulings were faulty in two respects.  OPINION HOLDS: After considering the asserted errors properly preserved, we affirm.