IN THE INTEREST OF E.B., Minor Child, M.V.B., Mother, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 7-444 / 07-0840
Filed July 12, 2007
IN THE INTEREST OF E.B.,
Minor Child,
M.V.B., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson,
Judge.
A mother appeals the removal, adjudication, and disposition orders in child
in need of assistance proceedings. AFFIRMED.
Christopher Kragnes, Des Moines, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney
General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Andrea Vitzthum, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee State.
Ryan Weese, West Des Moines, for intervenor foster parents.
Charles Fuson of the Youth Law Center, Des Moines, for the minor child.
Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Baker, J. and Beeghly, S.J.*
*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2007).
2
BEEGHLY, S.J.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
May is the mother of Elise, who was born in March 2001. 1 In November
2004, Elise came under the custody of the Iowa Department of Human Services
while May was in jail awaiting extradition to Texas. May set fire to a home in the
presence of Elise. Elise had continuing nightmares about this event, and was
diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder. The child was placed with foster
parents Rodney and Donna in Iowa.
In February 2005, the Iowa district court appointed James and Sheri as
guardians of the child. James and Sheri were residents of Texas, and Elise
moved to Texas. May was convicted of theft and arson in Texas and is serving a
prison sentence there. In May 2005, James and Sheri brought Elise back to
Iowa and left her with Rodney and Donna, the original foster parents. They did
not inform the Department they were no longer caring for Elise. James and Sheri
gave Rodney and Donna power of attorney for the child. The guardianship was
closed in February 2006.
After the Department became aware of the situation, the State filed a
petition in Iowa juvenile court in May 2006 seeking to have Elise adjudicated a
child in need of assistance (CINA). The juvenile court entered an order removing
the child from May’s care. The court then stayed the Iowa proceedings because
1
The whereabouts of the father are unknown. He has not been involved in the child’s
life.
3
there were proceedings pending in Texas regarding Elise. 2
The matter then
languished for several months due to uncertainty concerning whether Iowa or
Texas had jurisdiction of the child.
The Texas case was dismissed on April 4, 2007. On April 30, 2007, the
juvenile court in Iowa entered an order removing Elise from May’s care and
placing her in foster care. The court adjudicated Elise CINA pursuant to Iowa
Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2) (2005) (child is likely to suffer harm due to parent’s
failure to exercise care in supervision), (j) (child is without a parent, guardian, or
other custodian and (n) (parent’s imprisonment results in child not receiving
adequate care). A disposition order was entered on the same date. May has
appealed the removal, adjudication, and disposition orders.
II. Standard of Review
Our scope of review in juvenile court proceedings is de novo. In re K.N.,
625 N.W.2d 731, 733 (Iowa 2001).
Although we give weight to the juvenile
court’s factual findings, we are not bound by them. Id. Our primary concern is
the best interests of the child. In re E.H., 578 N.W.2d 243, 248 (Iowa 1998).
III. Merits
May contends the juvenile court should not have adjudicated Elise CINA.
She states Rodney and Donna may provide for Elise without juvenile court
intervention. She believes Elise’s needs may be met without the supervision of
the juvenile court. May asserts Elise has not suffered any harmful effects by
staying with Rodney and Donna.
2
At about the same time they were named guardians, James and Sheri initiated
proceedings in Texas seeking to terminate May’s parental rights. They later sought to
dismiss the case, but due to several motions filed by May, the case continued.
4
In seeking to have Elise adjudicated CINA, the State pointed out May was
in prison in Texas, and the guardianship held by James and Sheri has been
dissolved. Therefore, the power of attorney given to Rodney and Donna by the
guardians may no longer be effective.
The State argued Elise had been
abandoned in the State of Iowa with no one to make decisions for her,
necessitating ongoing juvenile court supervision. The guardian ad litem agreed
Elise was a homeless child, but for the intervention of the State.
The juvenile court stated it was adjudicating Elise CINA “to resolve some
of the uncertainties here going forward, particularly as they would relate to
authorization for medical care and any other needs that the child might have.”
On our de novo review, we concur in the juvenile court’s decision. Elise was left
in Iowa without parental supervision or an effective guardianship. It is unknown
when May will be released from prison. May committed arson in the presence of
her child, thereby causing harm to the child. Even when May is released, it is
unlikely she could immediately safely resume care of Elise. We conclude the
juvenile court’s supervision is necessary under the facts of this case.
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.
