Most Recent Court of Appeals Summaries

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, The Honorable Shane M. Wiley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. (4 pages)

            Jerry Johnson appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after revocation of his deferred judgment, claiming the court abused its discretion by sentencing him to prison. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the sentence imposed by the court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Delaware County, The Honorable Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (7 pages)

            In this consolidated appeal, A.A. appeals from the entry of the stipulated decree establishing custody, physical care, and support of her child with L.S. and from the corresponding modification of her Iowa Code chapter 236A (2023) protective order.  She argues (1) we can consider her affidavit attached to an Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(2) motion stating what she believed occurred during mediation in the custody proceedings; (2) the district court judge should have recused herself from ruling on A.A.’s post-decree motions and L.S.’s Iowa Court Rule 6.807 motion, (3) the district court should have considered her rule 1.904(2) motion to serve as a motion for new trial, and (4) the judge’s conduct during mediation requires the decree be vacated and a new trial granted.  OPINION HOLDS: We cannot consider the affidavit.  A.A. failed to preserve error on her claim regarding the district court judge’s recusal.  Even if we consider A.A.’s 1.904(2) motion to serve as a new trial motion, there is no basis to grant a new trial.  As such, we have no basis to grant A.A. with relief in either proceeding. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Mark T. Hostager, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Badding, J., and Telleen, S.J. Opinion by Telleen, S.J. (3 pages)

            Erik Hanson challenges his guilty plea to assault causing bodily injury. Hanson contends the district court denied him the right to counsel by failing to (1) inquire into the breakdown of the attorney-client relationship, (2) inquire into his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, and (3) appoint substitute new trial counsel. OPINION HOLDS: Because Hanson waived any conflict claim with his counsel, we lack jurisdiction to hear this appeal. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, The Honorable John M. Wright, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Doyle, S.J. Buller, J., takes no part. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (5 pages)

            Dakota Poland brings a second postconviction relief (PCR) application alleging his prior PCR counsel was ineffective.  The State alleges the application is barred by the three-year statute of limitations set forth in Iowa Code section 822.3 (2022).  OPINION HOLDS: Because Poland’s second PCR application was filed more than three years after procedendo issued in his first appeal, and because the State did not waive its statute of limitations defense, the application is time-barred and must be dismissed.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable David Nelmark, Judge. CONVICTION AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED IN PART, AND CASE REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (8 pages)

            Ray Rice Jr. appeals his conviction for domestic-abuse assault while using or displaying a dangerous weapon, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict. He also appeals his sentence, challenging a provision in a no-contact order that found he and his mother were “intimate partners” and another prohibiting him from possessing a firearm based on that finding. OPINION HOLDS: Because substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict, we affirm Rice’s conviction. And we accept the parties’ agreement that there is no factual basis for the intimate-partner finding. So we vacate the no-contact order’s intimate-partner finding and its firearm prohibition based on that finding and remand for the district court to enter a corrected no-contact order.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Page County, The Honorable Craig M. Dreismeier, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, P.J. (5 pages)

            Charles White appeals the denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR). He alleges ineffective assistance of his PCR counsel.  OPINION HOLDS:  Because we find his ineffective assistance claims were not preserved, and even if they had been preserved we would reject them on the merits, we affirm the district court’s denial of White’s application for postconviction relief.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Jesse Ramirez, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Bower, S.J. (6 pages)

            Taurean Murray Jr. appeals his conviction as a person ineligible to carry a dangerous weapon under Iowa Code section 724.8B (2024). He argues the statute is facially unconstitutional under both the United States and Iowa Constitutions and asserts the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

     Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (North) County, The Honorable Joshua P. Schier, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (8 pages)

            A criminal defendant appeals from his discretionary sentence following a guilty plea. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court properly considered the defendant’s statements regarding his knowledge of the victim’s age and the court was not required to accept the defendant’s expert testimony at face value, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, The Honorable James N. Daane, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (3 pages)

            A postconviction applicant appeals the denial of relief. OPINION HOLDS: Based on the postconviction court’s credibility findings and the applicant’s failure to argue or prove he would have demanded a trial with different counsel, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Adam D. Sauer, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Ahlers, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (3 pages)

            Jerell McKnight argues there is an insufficient factual basis for his guilty plea to two counts of willful injury resulting in bodily injury. OPINION HOLDS: We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because McKnight failed to establish good cause to challenge his guilty plea due to his failure to file a motion in arrest of judgment. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, The Honorable Tom Reidel, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Chicchelly and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (11 pages)

            John Robert West challenges his convictions for seven counts of sexual abuse in the second degree and four counts of lascivious acts with a child. He contends (1) the crimes occurred in a different state, so Iowa lacks territorial jurisdiction; (2) there is an impermissible variance between how three of the counts of sexual abuse in the second degree were charged in the trial information and how they were proved at trial; (3) there is insufficient evidence that he was at least sixteen years old (a required element of proof of lascivious acts with a child); and (4) the district court failed to give sufficient reasons for imposing consecutive sentences. OPINION HOLDS: West’s territorial jurisdiction claim fails due to evidence of preparatory acts that occurred in Iowa. His claim that there was a variance between how three counts were described in the trial information and how they were proved at trial fails because he cannot establish prejudice. Substantial evidence supports the district court’s finding that West was at least sixteen years old based on the observations of West at trial coupled with corroborating circumstantial evidence. And his sentencing challenge fails because the district court provided adequate reasons for imposing consecutive sentences. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, The Honorable Myron Gookin, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (7 pages)

            Jereme Owens appeals his jury conviction for stalking in violation of a protective order.  On appeal, Owens argues there was insufficient evidence to show (1) he engaged in a course of conduct, (2) he intended to cause fear or harm, and (3) the victim felt terrorized, intimidated, or threatened.  OPINION HOLDS:  Because substantial evidence supports each element of stalking, we affirm Owens’s conviction.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable David M. Cox, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Langholz, J., and Bower, S.J. Opinion by Buller, P.J. (6 pages)

            A postconviction applicant appeals from the denial of his second application for postconviction relief. OPINION HOLDS: Finding the actual-innocence claim presented by the applicant is barred by the statute of limitations, prohibition against piecemeal litigation, or both, we affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. Concurrence in Judgment by Buller, J. (7 pages)

            A father appeals the private termination of his parental rights to his two children under Iowa Code chapter 600A (2024). OPINION HOLDS: Because the juvenile court did not appoint a guardian ad litem for the children as required by Iowa Code section 600A.6(2), we must reverse and remand for the court to appoint a guardian ad litem and conduct a new termination hearing. CONCURRENCE IN JUDGMENT ASSERTS: Writing on a clean slate, I would require a showing of prejudice to obtain reversal when a guardian ad litem is not appointed. But, given the command of stare decisis and the mother’s failure to overtly request we overrule existing published case law, I reluctantly concur in the judgment to reverse.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Valerie L. Clay, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Schumacher, and Sandy, JJ., but decided by Tabor, C.J., and Greer, Schumacher, Badding, and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. Special concurrence by Tabor, C.J. (13 pages)

            James David Smith challenges the district court’s denial of his Batson challenge, arguing the State’s proffered reason for striking a potential juror was pretextual. OPINION HOLDS: Smith failed to meet his burden to prove the State’s proffered reason for the strike was pretextual. We affirm. SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur that we cannot grant Smith relief on this record but write separately to emphasize that our opinion today was limited by trial counsel’s decision not to engage in the third step of the Batson analysis. Iowa attorneys do not enjoy free reign to exercise peremptory strikes against any prospective juror who does not speak perfect English.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, The Honorable Jennifer Miller (trial), and The Honorable Kathryn E. Austin (sentencing), Judges. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Schumacher, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Schumacher, P.J. (5 pages)

            Kasmino Moses appeals his conviction for assault with intent to commit sexual abuse, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. He also asserts the district court abused its discretion by sentencing him to prison. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, The Honorable Shane M. Wiley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (4 pages)

            Kenji Meeks appeals the denial of his application for postconviction relief, arguing the trial court’s Faretta colloquy was insufficient to ensure his knowing and intelligent waiver of trial counsel.  OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the trial court’s colloquy was sufficient to advise Meeks of the danger in continuing without counsel under the circumstances of his case and affirm the denial of postconviction relief.  

            Discretionary review from the Iowa District Court for Appanoose County, The Honorable Rose Ann Mefford, Judge. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., Langholz, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Vogel, S.J. (6 pages)

            Stanley Spencer appeals an order assessing liquidated damages against him after he was convicted of twenty counts of abandonment of a dead or injured animal in violation of Iowa Code section 481A.137 (2021).  Spencer argues that, based on the plain language of the relevant Iowa Code provisions, his convictions did not support an award of liquidated damages.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we agree, reverse the liquidated-damages award, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Lawrence P. McLellan, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Badding, P.J., Buller, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (7 pages)

            Jill and Steven Struve appeal the adverse rulings granting summary judgment and directed verdicts on four claims of medical malpractice against Dr. Mark Isaacson after he performed a total knee arthroplasty on Jill’s right knee in December 2020. OPINION HOLDS: I. Because the Struves did not present substantial evidence that Dr. Isaacson breached the professional standard of care in treating Jill as required to prove medical malpractice, the district court did not err by directing verdicts in favor of Dr. Isaacson. II. We affirm the grant of summary judgment for Dr. Isaacson on a claim that the Struves abandoned in their argument to the district court.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Buller, P.J., Sandy, J., and Vogel, S.J. Opinion by Buller, P.J. (3 pages)

            A criminal defendant attempts to appeal following her guilty plea. OPINION HOLDS: Finding we lack jurisdiction or authority to review her claims, we dismiss the attempted appeal.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (12 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights in a private termination action, arguing (1) there is not clear and convincing evidence that he abandoned the child under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2024) and (2) termination is not in the child’s best interests. OPINION HOLDS: Because mother proved by clear and convincing evidence that the father abandoned the child under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3) and that termination of the father’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests, we affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, The Honorable Jennifer Benson Bahr, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (12 pages)

            Jay and Lori Straight appeal from the summary dismissal of their claims against Hagie Manufacturing Company, LLC.  The Straights argue the district court incorrectly concluded that the economic loss doctrine barred their claims.  OPINION HOLDS: On our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, The Honorable Crystal S. Cronk, Judge. AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND REVERSED ON CROSS-APPEAL. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (14 pages)

            Colten appeals the district court’s elimination of his parenting time to his two daughters. Christy cross-appeals and seeks sole legal custody of their three children. OPINION HOLDS: Elimination of Colten’s parenting time is in the best interests of the daughters. And because of Colten’s animosity toward Christy and the communication challenges they face in making decisions, giving Christy sole legal custody is also in the best interests of the children.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Kristen Formanek, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (7 pages)

            Joshua Uranga appeals his conviction following a plea of guilty, claiming the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss based on an alleged speedy-indictment violation. OPINION HOLDS: Following our review, we dismiss Uranga’s appeal. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Butler County, The Honorable Blake H. Norman, Judge. AFFIRMED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J., Dissent by Sandy, J.  (15 pages)

            Chuck Clemen sued Dollar General and its landlord, alleging they were negligent in failing to maintain a sidewalk as required by a city ordinance and in failing to warn about its deteriorated condition.  Finding the defendants owed Clemen no duty of care, the district court granted summary judgment.  Clemen appeals.  OPINION HOLDS: We agree that no duty of care exists under any of the theories Clemen preserved for our review.  We therefore affirm the dismissal of his negligence claims.  DISSENT ASSERTS: Cities may be responsible for sidewalk maintenance. But businesses have a duty to arrange their entrances in a way that minimizes travel over known hazards. Thus, the question of whether Dollar General’s placement of merchandise displays breached that duty by increasing the risk to customers is a fact question for a jury. Because genuine issues of material fact remain on that question of breach, I would reverse the grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings. I respectfully dissent. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, The Honorable Monica Zrinyi Ackley, Judge. SENTENCE VACATED AND CASE REMANDED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (10 pages)

            Bryce Murphy appeals his concurrent ten- and five-year indeterminate prison sentences imposed after pleading guilty to first-degree fraudulent practice and insurance fraud. He argues that the district court improperly considered much unproven and unadmitted conduct, abused its discretion in selecting prison sentences rather than deferred judgments, and violated his constitutional due-process rights by considering the unproven conduct. OPINION HOLDS: We agree with Murphy that the district court improperly considered unproven and unadmitted conduct in the minutes of testimony for this case and new charges against Murphy that were still pending at the time of sentencing. But it was not improper for the court to consider evidence of Murphy’s similar previous conduct described in an administrative law judge’s decision denying Murphy unemployment benefits or Murphy’s guilty pleas to offenses in Illinois even though he had successfully completed “Second Chance Probation” so they were not convictions under Illinois law. And because resentencing is required, we need not consider Murphy’s other arguments. We thus vacate Murphy’s sentence and remand for resentencing.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cass County, The Honorable Amy Zacharias, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (27 pages)

            Tyler Wagner attacks the district court’s dissolution of marriage decree on several fronts: (1) the denial of joint physical care of the parties’ children that was agreed to as part of a mediated agreement and instead the grant of physical care to Alisha Wagner; (2) the distribution of the marital property and debts; (3) the award of retroactive child support and daycare expenses; and (4) the calculation of child and medical support awarded.  OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we affirm the terms of the decree on all fronts except for a few issues.  In that vein, we remand the case for a recalculation of child support using Tyler’s current hourly wage income.  Because the issue was not preserved, we affirm, as modified, the part of the decree imposing a judgment for back temporary child support.  We also modify the amount of property settlement awarded to Alisha after making several adjustments to the allocation of assets and debts.  Specifically, as to the custody issue, after weighing the best interests of the children, we find the children will be best served under a joint legal custody arrangement with physical care of the children placed with Alisha.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (2 pages)

            A criminal defendant attempts to appeal his guilty plea, claiming the court provided inadequate advisories when he entered his plea. OPINION HOLDS: Because he failed to move in arrest of judgment or claim he would not have pled guilty absent any alleged defects, we dismiss his attempted appeal.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, The Honorable Joel Dalrymple, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (7 pages)

            DeMarquis Forney appeals his conviction for stalking in violation of a protective order, arguing the conviction is not supported by sufficient evidence. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Michael Motto, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (3 pages)

            Joshua DeWeerdt appeals his conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense, claiming the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Ian K. Thornhill, Judge. AFFIRMED ON APPEAL; WRIT SUSTAINED AND REMANDED. Heard at oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (19 pages)

            Chris Darville appeals from the decree dissolving his marriage to Jennifer Darville (n/k/a Jennifer Duffy) and the order finding him in contempt of court for violating a temporary injunction.  He challenges the denial of joint physical care of the parties’ minor child, seeks to lower his child support obligation, contests the monetary penalty imposed as punishment for his contempt, and objects to the court’s assessment of Jennifer’s trial attorney fees.  OPINION HOLDS: Treating Chris’s appeal of the contempt sanction as a petition for writ of certiorari, we sustain the writ and remand for further proceedings.  On all other issues, we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, The Honorable David Faith, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Chicchelly, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (9 pages)

            A parent appeals from a ruling on his petition to modify custody of his two children. OPINION HOLDS: Because the parent failed to meet his burden to justify disrupting the custodial arrangement, we affirm.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Korie Talkington, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to one child, arguing the department failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification when it declined to arrange a hair test to confirm or refute the results of a positive sweat patch.  OPINION HOLDS: Under the circumstances of this case, providing a confirmatory test at the mother’s request was not a reasonable-efforts requirement.  We find the department provided ample services to facilitate reunification and assist the mother in addressing her substance use.  We therefore affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, The Honorable Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (5 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights.  On appeal, he argues termination of his parental rights was not in the best interests of the children.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our review, we find termination was in the children’s best interests and affirm the termination of the father’s parental rights.     

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, The Honorable Paul G. Crawford, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, contesting the ground for termination and denial of a six-month extension. OPINION HOLDS: Because the father has made little progress and cannot safely parent the child, we affirm the termination of his parental rights and denial of additional time. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, The Honorable Emily Dean, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (8 pages)

            A mother and father separately appeal the termination of parental rights to their five children under Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(f) and (h). OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the father waived his argument on appeal, and termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests. We also conclude the juvenile correctly denied the mother’s request for a six-month extension to work towards reunification. We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Plymouth County, The Honorable Daniel P. Vakulskas, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (6 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to a seventeen-year-old daughter, arguing the court failed to consider reasonable efforts and should have established a guardianship with her aunt. OPINION HOLDS: Although the court wrongly decided that reasonable efforts did not factor into the grounds for termination, we see no reason to reverse its conclusion the grounds were met. We also find a guardianship is not in the teen’s best interests. So we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Susan Cox, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to one child, arguing termination is not in the child’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we conclude termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests.  We therefore affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, The Honorable Stephanie Forker Parry, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (5 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights to his daughter. First, he challenges one of the two grounds for termination found by juvenile court. And second, he argues that termination is not in the daughter’s best interest. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review, we agree with the juvenile court. The father challenges only one statutory ground for termination, so he has waived any challenge to the other ground. And we agree that termination is in the daughter’s best interest even though the Department had not yet identified an adoptive home for her at the time of termination. After ten foster-care placements in her short life and no likelihood of successful reunification with the father, she deserves permanency now rather than remaining in limbo. We thus affirm the juvenile court’s termination order.

           Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Korie Talkington, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (3 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: To the extent any issue is properly before us, we affirm the juvenile court’s analysis and decision. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, The Honorable Joan M. Black, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (3 pages)

            A father appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing that termination is not in the best interests of his two boys because a guardianship with their grandmother is a viable permanency alternative.  OPINION HOLDS: We are unpersuaded that transferring guardianship to the grandmother would better serve these boys.  Termination of the father’s rights is in their best interests. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, The Honorable Shawna L. Ditsworth, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights to twins, born in 2022. OPINION HOLDS: Because clear and convincing evidence supports terminating the mother’s parental rights and termination is in the children’s best interests, we affirm.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Jasper County, The Honorable Steven J. Holwerda, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (8 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children. She contends statutory grounds for termination were not established, termination is not the children’s best interests, and she should be given additional time to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: We find clear and convincing evidence that the children could not be returned to the mother’s custody, so grounds for termination have been established. We also find that termination is in the children’s best interests, and additional time to work toward reunification is not warranted. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, The Honorable Emily Dean, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Buller, J. (2 pages)

            A parent appeals from a permanency order placing the child in guardianship with adult relatives. OPINION HOLDS: Assuming without deciding we can reach the merits, we find the father failed to timely request additional services and was unable to safely resume care of the child in six months, so we affirm. 

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Adam D. Sauer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (4 pages)

            A father appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights to his son. He argues that the court should have dismissed the child-in-need-of-assistance case against him and that the Department failed to provide reasonable efforts toward reunification when he was incarcerated. OPINION HOLDS: We cannot consider either argument. The father did not appeal the child-in-need-of-assistance adjudication, and he cannot now challenge it in this appeal from the termination order in a separate proceeding. And the father did not object to the adequacy of the Department’s reasonable efforts before the termination hearing. So it is too late to raise that challenge now.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, The Honorable Michael Motto Jr., Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Sandy, J. (5 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two of her children, born in 2016 and 2017. The mother argues termination is not the children’s best interests and, alternatively, that a guardianship should be established in lieu of termination. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, The Honorable Erik I. Howe, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Badding and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, C.J. (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her daughter. She contends termination is not in the child’s best interests, an exception applies to preclude termination, and a guardianship should be established. OPINION HOLDS: Because we find termination is in the child’s best interests, no exception applies to preclude termination, and a guardianship is not preferable, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, The Honorable Kimberly K. Shepherd, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (7 pages)

            A disestablished father seeks to have the juvenile court’s order disestablishing paternity overturned. OPINION HOLDS: Because disestablishing T.S.’s paternity was in the child’s best interests, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, The Honorable Cynthia S. Finley, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Ahlers, P.J., and Buller and Sandy, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, P.J. (6 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights.  She challenges the statutory grounds for termination and whether termination is in the children’s best interests.  OPINION HOLDS: The children could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing, and termination of her parental rights is in the children’s best interests.  

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Story County, The Honorable Hunter W. Thorpe, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (7 pages)

            A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor child. She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the grounds for termination, claims termination is not in the child’s best interests, argues a permissive exception to termination should be applied, and requests additional time to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: Upon review, we affirm.

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Shelby County, The Honorable Charles D. Fagan, Judge. AFFIRMED ON BOTH APPEALS. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Schumacher, J. (10 pages)

            Parents separately appeal the termination of their parental rights to their child, born in 2023. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the record supports grounds for termination, termination is in the child’s best interests, the parents waived their reasonable-efforts claims, and additional time for reunification efforts is unwarranted. Accordingly, we affirm on both appeals.   

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, The Honorable Adam D. Sauer, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered without oral argument by Greer, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (9 pages)

            A mother appeals from a permanency order establishing a guardianship under Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(d)(2) (2025) for one child. OPINION HOLDS: Upon our de novo review, we cannot find that the need for removal would no longer exist in six months.  Thus, we affirm the juvenile court’s ruling.