IN THE INTEREST OF T.S., S.M., and L.M., Minor Children, G.S.M., Father, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 7-680 / 07-1359
Filed October 12, 2007
IN THE INTEREST OF T.S., S.M., and L.M.,
Minor Children,
G.S.M., Father,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County, Steven J. Oeth,
District Associate Judge.
A father appeals from the order adjudicating his children as children in
need of assistance. AFFIRMED.
Mark Rasmussen, Jefferson, for appellant father.
Vicki Copeland, Jefferson, for mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney
General, and Nicola Martino, County Attorney, for appellee State.
Dennis Ladd, Jefferson, for minor children.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Eisenhauer, JJ.
2
ZIMMER, J.
A father appeals from the order adjudicating his children as children in
need of assistance. We affirm.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
Tamara A. is the mother of Tiffany, born in 1993; Erica, born in 1994;
Stephen, born in 1996; and Luke, born in 1998. George M. is the father of
Tiffany, Stephen, and Luke. 1
Tamara and George were married and divorced twice.
Their final
separation occurred in 2001. Tamara and George have shared joint custody of
Tiffany, Stephen, and Luke for the past six years. Under the custody agreement,
the children lived with each parent on an every-other-week basis. Erica went
back and forth between the residences of Tamara and George with her halfsiblings.
The children came to the attention of the Iowa Department of Human
Services (Department) in May 2007, after Erica reported that George had
inappropriately touched the clothing covering her breasts and vagina.
Erica
informed her mother she was no longer comfortable going to George’s house.
Tiffany, Stephen, and Luke reported that their father had not touched them
inappropriately.
On May 21, 2007, the State filed a petition alleging Tiffany, Stephen, and
Luke should be adjudicated children in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa
Code section 232.2(6)(d) (2007) (child has been, or is imminently likely to be,
sexually abused by member of household in which child resides).
1
Erica has not seen her biological father since she was a year and a half old.
At the
3
adjudicatory hearing, the court received reports from the police and the
Department. The court also heard testimony from Tamara, Erica, Tiffany, a police
officer, and George’s father. In an order filed on July 20, 2007, the juvenile court
found the testimony of Erica was compelling, and concluded Erica’s half-siblings
should be adjudicated CINA as to their father because they were likely to be
sexually abused by him.
The court entered a dispositional order on August 3, 2007. The order
provided that custody of Tiffany, Stephen, and Luke would remain with their
mother for purposes of placement in her home and granted George supervised
visitation with the children. Additionally, the court ordered George to participate
in counseling with a therapist specializing in sexual offenses and follow through
with any recommendations made by the therapist.
George seeks reversal of the juvenile court order adjudicating the children
as CINA.
II. Scope and Standards of Review.
We review CINA cases de novo. In re K.N., 625 N.W.2d 731, 733 (Iowa
2001). Although we are not bound by the juvenile court’s factual findings, we
give them weight, especially when credibility is at issue. In re D.T., 435 N.W.2d
323, 329 (Iowa 1989). Our primary concern is the best interests of the children.
In re E.H., 578 N.W.2d 243, 248 (Iowa 1998). The State must prove the CINA
allegations by clear and convincing evidence. Iowa Code § 232.96(2).
III. Discussion.
In this appeal, George contends the CINA allegations for Tiffany, Stephen,
and Luke were not supported by clear and convincing evidence.
Clear and
4
convincing evidence is evidence that leaves “no serious or substantial doubt
about the correctness of the conclusion drawn from it.” Raim v. Stancel, 339
N.W.2d 621, 624 (Iowa Ct. App. 1983).
The children were adjudicated CINA under section 232.2(6)(d).
That
section applies to children “[w]ho ha[ve] been, or [are] imminently likely to be,
sexually abused by the child[ren]’s parent, guardian, custodian or other member
of the household in which the child[ren] reside[ ].” Iowa Code § 232.2(6)(d)
(emphasis added). Upon review of the entire record in this case, we find clear
and convincing evidence supports the decision of the juvenile court.
On May 6, 2007, a police officer met with Tamara, Erica, Tiffany, and a
service provider from the Department. The police report indicated Erica told her
mother that on April 28, 2007, after George directed her brothers to leave the
home, he held Erica on his lap, kissed her face, and then rubbed her “down
there,” stopping only when her brother reentered the home. The report also
stated that when asked if this had happened before, Erica told her mother that
George had “grabb[ed] her boobs a lot.” The officer asked Erica about a note
that Tamara had found next her bed, which stated:
Mom. I don’t [want] to go to George’s house. I don’t feel
[comfortable because] he has been [squeezing] my boobs. And
Saturday when you guys [went away] he raped my v--. So I don’t
[want] to go anymore. Sincerely, Erica.
Erica told the officer that she did write the note, and that the letter “v” meant
vagina.
5
The juvenile court heard testimony from Erica indicating that George had
inappropriately touched her. 2 Although George did not testify at the adjudicatory
hearing, he argued the evidence presented showed that any contact that
occurred between him and Erica was not sexual in nature. The court, however,
found Erica’s testimony to be credible and compelling. See State v. Knox, 536
N.W.2d 735, 742-43 (Iowa 1995) (stating the fact-finder sits in the best position to
judge whom and what to believe).
Although the record reveals no direct injury to Tiffany, Stephen, and Luke
at this point in time, our juvenile statutes are preventive as well as remedial. In
re L.L., 459 N.W.2d 489, 494 (Iowa 1990). Our supreme court has previously
stated that “ordinarily, all siblings are at risk when one child has been sexually
abused.” In re D.D., 653 N.W.2d 359, 362 (Iowa 2002); see also In re A.B., 492
N.W.2d 446, 447 (Iowa Ct. App. 1992) (ordering CINA petition filed on all children
after allegations of sexual and physical abuse of one child).
Examining the
record, it is apparent that George treated Erica in the same manner as he treated
Tiffany, Stephen, and Luke.
At the adjudicatory hearing, Erica agreed that
George had acted as a caring stepfather toward her and had done a lot of things
for her in the past. Similarly, Tiffany acknowledged that George had tried to be
good to her when she lived with him. The children’s mother testified that “[Erica]
has the . . . same relationship with [George] that the other three children do . . . .”
The children’s guardian ad litem recommended that Tiffany, Luke, and
Stephen be adjudicated according to section 232.2(6)(d), that custody remain
2
The juvenile court noted that Erica responded to some questions by nodding or shaking
her head. However, the juvenile court found that the substance of her testimony was
communicated clearly.
6
with their mother, and that George have supervised visitation. Tiffany testified
that she would not want to stay overnight with her father because she felt
“scared” and “worried” that her father might do the same things to her that he did
to Erica. She also stated, however, that she and her other siblings would like to
have supervised contact with their father.
We conclude the juvenile court properly adjudicated all three children
CINA. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
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.
