IN THE INTEREST OF Y.R., Minor Child, D.J.B., Mother, Appellant, G.R., Father, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 8-904 / 08-1427
Filed November 13, 2008
IN THE INTEREST OF Y.R.,
Minor Child,
D.J.B., Mother,
Appellant,
G.R., Father,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karla J. Fultz,
Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother and father appeal the juvenile court’s termination of their
parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Joey T. Hoover of Kragnes & Associates, P.C., Des Moines, for appellant
father.
Karen Taylor of Taylor Law Office, Des Moines, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Annette Taylor,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Edward Bull of Bull Law Office, P.C., Des Moines, for minor child.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Potterfield, JJ.
2
POTTERFIELD, J.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
Dona and Guadalupe are the parents of a child who was born in
September 2006. The child was removed from Dona’s custody at the hospital
with her consent due to her use of narcotics during the pregnancy and
Guadalupe’s narcotics use and history of domestic violence. A child in need of
assistance petition was filed three days later. On November 7, 2006, Guadalupe
was arrested for assaulting Dona. On November 28, 2006, the juvenile court
adjudicated the child as a child in need of assistance and placed her in foster
care.
Dona began outpatient treatment at the House of Mercy and provided
clean drug screens until she relapsed on cocaine in the middle of January 2007.
She then chose to enter inpatient treatment at House of Mercy beginning on
February 9, 2007.
placement.
During this time, the child remained in her foster home
Guadalupe was still incarcerated.
Dona made consistent
improvement in all areas while at House of Mercy, and the child was returned to
Dona’s custody on July 11, 2007.
On October 31, 2007, Dona accepted a plea offer from the federal
government that would result in her incarceration for a substantial period of time.
The guardian ad litem filed a motion to modify placement. The court placed the
child in the legal custody of the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) but
allowed Dona to retain physical custody to allow the child to make a gradual
transition back to foster care.
3
On January 3, 2008, Guadalupe was released from prison. He had never
cared for his child, who was then fifteen months old. While in prison, Guadalupe
took a relapse prevention class and saw a therapist to deal with his drug usage
issues. He attended BEP and anger management classes. On January 23,
2008, the guardian ad litem filed a second motion to modify physical custody of
the child based on Dona’s upcoming federal prison sentence, the transition that
had been occurring with the foster parents, and statements made by Dona
leading the guardian ad litem to believe she was a flight risk.
Staff at House of Mercy overheard Dona commenting that she could leave
with her daughter and they would never find her. Dona had added Guadalupe to
her visitors list at House of Mercy when he was released from prison. Staff noted
that Dona was dishonest about the contact she had with Guadalupe and that she
did not understand why contact with him or her dishonesty would create concern.
The child was returned to her former foster parents.
A petition to terminate
parental rights was filed on April 25, 2008.
Guadalupe began visitation with the child in March 2008. The visits were
supervised and took place for about one hour per week. Guadalupe had not
used drugs since he was incarcerated. Guadalupe was not forthcoming with
information about his residence and testified that the residence was not
appropriate for the child.
Dona was arrested for driving while barred on July 10, 2008.1 On July 14,
2008, Guadalupe and Dona were involved in an altercation with a third party.
1
Dona later entered a guilty plea to the charge of operating a motor vehicle without a
valid license.
4
Dona was arrested and charged with assault causing bodily injury. Dona did not
disclose either arrest to the court at a July 21, 2008 hearing on her motion for
additional visitation and placement. The juvenile court made a finding that the
parties were not candid with the court regarding their relationship and living
arrangements.
In August 2008, the juvenile court determined that clear and convincing
evidence supported the termination of parental rights of both parents under Iowa
Code section 232.116(1)(d), (g), (h), (i), and (l) (2007). The court further found
that the termination of Guadalupe’s and Dona’s parental rights was in the best
interests of the child.
Guadalupe appeals arguing that the juvenile court erred in: (1) denying the
admission into evidence of a report he had prepared that explained his view of
the case; (2) finding that clear and convincing evidence supported the
termination of parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d), (f), and (h);
and (3) finding that termination of parental rights was in the child’s best interests.
Dona appeals arguing that the juvenile court erred in: (1) finding that clear
and convincing evidence supported the termination of parental rights under Iowa
Code section 232.116(1)(d), (g), (h), (i), and (l); (2) finding that termination of
parental rights was in the child’s best interests; and (3) failing to find that there
was clear and convincing evidence that the termination would be detrimental to
the child due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.
II. Standard of Review
We review proceedings to terminate parental rights de novo.
In re
Dameron, 306 N.W.2d 743, 745 (Iowa 1981). We review the facts as well as the
5
law and adjudicate parents’ rights anew. Id. We give weight to the findings of
the juvenile court, particularly with respect to the credibility of witnesses, but are
not bound by them. In re L.L., 459 N.W.2d 489, 493 (Iowa 1990). Grounds for
termination must be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
In re J.E., 723
N.W.2d 793, 798 (Iowa 2006).
III. Termination of Father’s Parental Rights
A. Statutory Grounds for Termination
Though the juvenile court terminated Guadalupe’s rights on more than one
statutory ground, we only need to find grounds to terminate his parental rights under
one of the grounds in order to affirm the ruling of the juvenile court. In re S.R., 600
N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999). Guadalupe does not argue on appeal that
the juvenile court erred in terminating his parental rights under Iowa Code section
232.116(1)(g) or (i). His failure to argue these statutory grounds is deemed a
waiver of the issue. Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(1)(c).
B. Failure to Admit Evidence
Guadalupe sought to admit into evidence his “point of view on the case.”
The guardian ad litem objected on the basis of best evidence. The juvenile court
then advised Guadalupe’s attorney that she would either accept the document or
his testimony, but not both, and his attorney agreed. We review evidentiary
rulings for an abuse of discretion. In re E.H. III, 578 N.W.2d 243, 245 (Iowa
1998). We find that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to
admit Guadalupe’s report. Guadalupe was present to testify at the hearing. He
was given ample opportunity to present his view of the case.
6
IV. Termination of Mother’s Parental Rights
We find that clear and convincing evidence supports the juvenile court’s
finding that a termination of Dona’s parental rights is appropriate under Iowa
Code section 232.116(1)(h).
Dona argues that evidence did not support
termination under the fourth element of this section, clear and convincing
evidence that the child cannot be returned to her custody at the present time.
The record shows that Dona is facing a substantial federal prison sentence and
will be unavailable to parent. She has been dishonest with care providers. She
has refused to provide the child with necessary items, such as a bed and
highchair. The juvenile court found that circumstantial evidence supports the
contention that Guadalupe, who has an extensive history of domestic abuse and
whose parental rights we are terminating, has been residing in Dona’s home.
Dona’s alleged close relationship with the child cannot overcome the weight of
the other factors that militate against her receiving custody of the child.
V. Best Interests of the Child
We agree with the juvenile court’s finding that a termination of parental
rights is in the best interests of the child. At the time of the trial, the child had
been in foster care for fifteen of the last twenty-two months. Dona is facing a
lengthy federal prison sentence.
Guadalupe has an extensive history of
domestic abuse and has not been able to arrange for a stable residence. The
child is in need of a safe home, which neither Dona nor Guadalupe can provide.
We therefore affirm the juvenile court’s termination of Guadalupe’s and
Dona’s parental rights.
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.
