Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 9-1029 / 09-1117 Filed December 30, 2009

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

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John G. Mullen, District Associate Judge.

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

Lauren M. Phelps, Bettendorf, and Patrick J. Kelly, Bettendorf, for appellant father. Timothy Tupper, Davenport, for mother. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Michael J. Walton, County Attorney, and Gerda Lane, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State. Patricia Rolfstad, Davenport, for minor child.

Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and Mansfield, JJ.

2 DOYLE, J. A father appeals from the order terminating his parental rights. Upon our de novo review, we affirm. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. J.M. is the father and E.R. is mother of A.M., born August 2004.1 When the child was born, the father was incarcerated, serving a federal sentence for a drug conviction. The father has a history of illegal substance use, and over the past twelve years, the father has been consistently incarcerated except for approximately a year-and-a-half. The father has not been involved in the child's life due to his incarceration, but the father has maintained involvement and interest in the child through contact with the Iowa Department of Human Services (Department). The child came to the attention of the Department in August 2007 following an incident with the mother. The child was removed from the mother's care in June 2008 and placed in relative custody. The State subsequently filed a petition alleging the child to be a child in need of assistance (CINA). Following an uncontested hearing on the petition, the child was adjudicated to be a CINA by the juvenile court on August 12, 2008. Ultimately, the mother was offered services but did not make any progress towards reunification with the child. The father remained incarcerated throughout the case, and he was not expected to be discharged from prison until 2012, though he hoped the date might be moved up in exchange for his testimony in

This appeal concerns only the father's parental rights. The child's mother has not appealed from the termination of her parental rights.

1

3 another case. On May 21, 2009, the State filed a petition to terminate the

parents' parental rights. Following a trial on the termination petition, the juvenile court entered its order terminating the parents' parental rights on numerous grounds. Relevant here, the court determined the father's parental rights should be terminated pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(b) (abandonment), (e) (child CINA, child removed for six months, parent has not maintained significant and meaningful contact with the child), (f) (child four or older, child CINA, removed from home for twelve of last eighteen months, and child cannot be returned home), (k) (child CINA, parent has chronic mental illness, child cannot be returned within a reasonable time), and (l) (child CINA, parent has substance abuse problem, child cannot be returned within a reasonable time) (2009). The father now appeals. II. Scope and Standards of Review. We review termination proceedings de novo. In re R.E.K.F., 698 N.W.2d 147, 149 (Iowa 2005). Although we give weight to the juvenile court's findings of fact, we are not bound by them. In re K.N., 625 N.W.2d 731, 733 (Iowa 2001). The grounds for termination must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. In re T.B., 604 N.W.2d 660, 661 (Iowa 2000). Evidence is clear and convincing when it leaves "no serious or substantial doubt about the correctness of the conclusion drawn from it." In re D.D., 653 N.W.2d 359, 361 (Iowa 2002). Our primary concern in termination cases is the best interests of the child. In re A.S., 743 N.W.2d 865, 867 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007).

4 III. Discussion. On appeal, the father contends the juvenile court erred in concluding the father's parental rights should be terminated on several of the grounds for termination found by the court. Nonetheless, the father concedes "that grounds do exist which would allow for termination of the father's rights," but argues that because some of the grounds were not proved, this court should "review [the] case and determine whether termination is actually in A.M.'s best interests." The father also argues that termination was not in the child's best interests for other reasons. A. Grounds for Termination. Although the juvenile court terminated the father's parental rights on several statutory grounds, we need only find that termination is appropriate on one ground to affirm. In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999). Upon our de novo review of the record, we find clear and convincing evidence supports termination of the father's parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f). The legislature incorporated a twelve-month limitation for children in need of assistance aged four or older. Iowa Code

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

Iowa Law