IN THE INTEREST OF N.E., J.E., and E.E., Minor Children, K.J.Q., Father, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 7-253 / 07-0389
Filed April 25, 2007
IN THE INTEREST OF N.E., J.E., and E.E.,
Minor Children,
K.J.Q., Father,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Constance Cohen,
Judge.
A father appeals from the termination of his parental rights to his three
children. AFFIRMED.
Brad Schroeder of Hartung & Schroeder, Des Moines, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Andrea Vitzthum,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Thomas Graves, Des Moines, for mother.
Kimberly Ayotte, Des Moines, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Vogel and Miller, JJ.
2
SACKETT, C.J.
Kevin is the father of Jataya, born in 2001, Elijah, born in 2002, and Nakia,
born in 2004. Following a hearing, the juvenile court concluded the State proved
by clear and convincing evidence that the father’s parental rights “should be
permanently terminated within the meaning of Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(b),
(d), (f), and (h) (2005).” However, the court ordered termination of his parental
rights only under sections (b) and (d).
On appeal, Kevin contends the elements of section 232.116(1)(d) were
not demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence. He does not make any
argument or cite any authority concerning section (b). We affirm the termination
of his parental rights under 232.116(1)(b). See Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(1)(c); In re
In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 911 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996).
He also contends termination was not in the children’s best interest,
arguing there was no evidence he does not have a strong bond with the children
and they are attached to him. The evidence in the record supports a finding any
bond or relationship between Kevin and the children has been significantly
damaged by his acts and omissions.
Giving “primary consideration to the
child[ren’s] safety, to the best placement for furthering the long-term nurturing
and growth of the child[ren], and to the physical, mental, and emotional condition
and needs of the child[ren],” we conclude the children’s needs are served by
terminating Kevin’s parental rights. Iowa Code § 232.116(2).
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
