Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 8-1002 / 08-1822 Filed December 31, 2008

IN THE INTEREST OF A.L., Minor Child, M.D.L., Father, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Carol S. Egly, District Associate Judge.

A father appeals from the order terminating his parental rights. AFFIRMED.

John Heinicke of Kragnes & Associates, P.C., Des Moines, for appellant father. Alexandra Nelissen of Nelissen & Juckette, P.C., Des Moines, for mother. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Kevin Brownell, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State. Jessica Miskimins, Des Moines, for minor child.

Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Mahan and Miller, JJ.

2 MAHAN, J. Mikel appeals the district court's order terminating his parental rights to his eighteen-month-old son, A.L. He claims the juvenile court erred in terminating his parental rights due to the exceptions provided in Iowa Code section 232.116(3) (2007). We affirm. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. A.L. is the child of Mikel and Tarayia.1 A.L. was removed from his home in March 2008 and was adjudicated a child in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) and (n) in May 2008 due to domestic abuse concerns and safety issues arising from Tarayia's instability, Mikel's criminal charges, and exposure to illegal drugs. A.L. was initially placed in foster care upon his removal in March 2008, but was moved within a week to the home of his paternal grandmother.2 The termination hearing was held in October 2008. Mikel had not seen A.L. in the six months prior to the termination hearing and had been incarcerated or on the run from criminal authorities since five days after A.L.'s birth in June 2007. At the time of the termination hearing, Mikel resided at the Fort Dodge Correctional Facility and was scheduled to be released on November 27, 2009. The district court found clear and convincing evidence supporting termination of Mikel's parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(d),(e), and (h). By order dated October 29, 2008, Mikel's parental rights were terminated. He now appeals.

1 2

The parental rights of Tarayia were also terminated, but she does not appeal. A.L. has remained in his grandmother's care since that time.

3 II. Scope and Standard of Review. We review termination of parental rights de novo. In re Z.H., 740 N.W.2d 648, 650-51 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007). Grounds for termination must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. In re J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793, 798 (Iowa 2006). Our primary concern is the best interests of the child. Id. III. Merits. The court terminated Mikel's parental rights pursuant to sections 232.116(1)(d),(e), and (h). The actual grounds for termination of his parental rights under these sections are not being contested or appealed. Mikel concedes the grounds for termination have been met. He contends, however, that the court erred in failing to consider the exceptions to termination as set forth in section 232.116(3)(a) and (c). The relevant portions of this section state: 3. The court need not terminate the relationship between the parent and child if the court finds any of the following: (a) A relative has legal custody of the child. .... (c) There is clear and convincing evidence that the termination would be detrimental to the child at the time due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship. Iowa Code

Download IN THE INTEREST OF A.L., Minor Child, M.D.L., Father, Appellant..pdf

Iowa Law