T.C., In Interest of, No. 91-1778

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtConsidered by McGIVERIN; SNELL; This is an appeal by the father; The initial question raised on this appeal is whether the juvenile court erred in adjudicating the children in need of assistance when the father was confined in a locked hospital menta
Citation492 N.W.2d 425
PartiesIn the Interest of T.C., N.C., and C.C., Minor Children, J.C., Father, Appellant.
Docket NumberNo. 91-1778
Decision Date25 November 1992

Page 425

492 N.W.2d 425
In the Interest of T.C., N.C., and C.C., Minor Children,
J.C., Father, Appellant.
No. 91-1778.
Supreme Court of Iowa.
Nov. 25, 1992.

Page 426

Jeffrey P. Taylor of Klinger, Robinson, McCuskey & Ford, Cedar Rapids, for appellant.

Bonnie J. Campbell, Atty. Gen., John M. Parmeter, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., and

Page 427

Charles K. Phillips, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee State.

Considered by McGIVERIN, C.J., and HARRIS, LARSON, SNELL, and ANDREASEN, JJ.

SNELL, Justice.

This is an appeal by the father, J.C., from the termination of his parental rights to his three children. The court of appeals affirmed the juvenile court's decision, and we granted further review. We now affirm the decision of the court of appeals and judgment of the juvenile court.

The initial question raised on this appeal is whether the juvenile court erred in adjudicating the children in need of assistance when the father was confined in a locked hospital mental ward and no guardian ad litem had been appointed to represent him. Additionally, J.C. asserts that the juvenile court erred in finding that the State had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the grounds asserted for termination of parental rights had been met.

The children involved in this action are T.C., a boy born October 30, 1981, M.C., a boy born November 24, 1982, and C.C., a girl born February 12, 1984. All of these children were born during the marriage of J.C. and W.C. The parental rights of their mother, W.C., have been terminated and are not involved in this appeal.

The children were adjudicated children in need of assistance on September 8, 1987, pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2) (1987). At the time of the adjudication, J.C. and W.C. were separated and the children were in the physical care and control of their mother, W.C.

W.C. and her attorney were present at the CINA proceedings. The children were also present and were represented by their attorney and guardian ad litem, Patrick Grady. J.C. did not appear nor was he represented by anyone at the CINA adjudication. He was served with notice of the CINA proceeding on August 26, 1987, while incarcerated at the Linn County Jail. At the time of that hearing, J.C. was hospitalized on an involuntary substance abuse commitment order. J.C. was released on September 15, 1987, after the adjudicatory hearing on the CINA petition. J.C. did not request an appointment of counsel in the CINA proceeding nor did he participate in any hearing concerning that action.

The record shows that the children's guardian ad litem and attorney and their mother and her attorney stipulated that the children were in need of assistance. The court entered its order in accordance with that stipulation. The court found that the children had suffered or were imminently likely to suffer harmful effects as a result of the parents' failure to exercise a reasonable degree of care in their supervision within the meaning of Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2).

In January 1988, four months after the adjudication of the children in need of assistance, J.C. was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance. On April 15, 1988, J.C. was sentenced to serve thirty years in prison as a result of that conviction. He has been continuously confined in prison since that time. The sentence now being served by J.C. is the result of a severe heroin addiction. His earliest date of release on parole is March 1993.

On April 19, 1991, the State filed a petition seeking to terminate the parental rights of W.C. and J.C. On April 23, 1991, J.C. filed an application for appointment of counsel and a financial statement. The district court appointed counsel to represent J.C. The hearing on the termination petition was scheduled for July 17, 1991. On July 12, 1991, J.C. filed a motion for continuance in order to obtain the reports and testimony of two psychologists. On July 17, 1991, the court denied the motion for continuance. The court allowed the record to remain open so J.C. could present the testimony of the two psychologists.

During the hearing, the court took judicial notice of the previous court files in the CINA actions filed on behalf of the children. J.C.'s counsel objected to the testimony in the CINA proceeding regarding the adoptability of the children. Counsel for J.C. also objected to the introduction on cross-examination by the State of evidence

Page 428

regarding J.C.'s juvenile court record. Following the hearing, the court ordered the termination of J.C.'s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) (1991).

In reaching its decision, the juvenile court entered extensive findings of fact, noting that J.C. is incarcerated for delivery of a controlled substance (second offense) that resulted in a death. His thirty-year sentence is subject to a mandatory minimum term of ten years. The court further found that it was not in the best interest of the children to elect long-term foster care in lieu of termination of parental rights.

Appellate review of termination proceedings is de novo. In re W.G., 349 N.W.2d 487, 491 (Iowa 1984), cert....

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 practice notes
  • In re Nathaniel A., No. 2850
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 3 d1 Janeiro d1 2005
    ...assistance proceeding. The papers must be marked, identified, and made a part of the record."); In the Interest of T.C., N.C., and C.C., 492 N.W.2d 425, 429 (Iowa 1992)("The juvenile court was authorized to judicially notice the pleadings and exhibits from the previous child in need of assi......
  • C.V., Matter of, No. 20277
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • 12 d4 Março d4 1998
    ...found abused and neglected. 4 Page 21 ¶10 The Iowa Supreme Court faced a similar procedural defect in the case of In Interest of T.C., 492 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa 1992). There, the parents of three children were separated and the children were in the physical care and control of their mother. An a......
  • Jack v. P & A Farms, Ltd., No. 11–0877.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • 2 d5 Novembro d5 2012
    ...parental rights hearing when counsel is present on the parent's behalf. 470 N.W.2d 48, 52 (Iowa Ct.App.1991); cf. In re Interest of T.C., 492 N.W.2d 425, 428–29 (Iowa 1992) (finding father was not denied his due process rights at child-in-need-of-assistance (CINA) adjudicatory hearing due t......
  • J.P., In Interest of, No. 92-1328
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Iowa
    • 23 d2 Fevereiro d2 1993
    ...the Iowa Supreme Court chose to terminate appellant's parental rights rather than place the child in long-term foster care. In re T.C., 492 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa Child custody should be quickly fixed and little disturbed. These children have been living in foster care for [one and one-half years......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
27 cases
  • In re Nathaniel A., No. 2850
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 3 d1 Janeiro d1 2005
    ...assistance proceeding. The papers must be marked, identified, and made a part of the record."); In the Interest of T.C., N.C., and C.C., 492 N.W.2d 425, 429 (Iowa 1992)("The juvenile court was authorized to judicially notice the pleadings and exhibits from the previous child in need of assi......
  • C.V., Matter of, No. 20277
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • 12 d4 Março d4 1998
    ...found abused and neglected. 4 Page 21 ¶10 The Iowa Supreme Court faced a similar procedural defect in the case of In Interest of T.C., 492 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa 1992). There, the parents of three children were separated and the children were in the physical care and control of their mother. An a......
  • Jack v. P & A Farms, Ltd., No. 11–0877.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • 2 d5 Novembro d5 2012
    ...parental rights hearing when counsel is present on the parent's behalf. 470 N.W.2d 48, 52 (Iowa Ct.App.1991); cf. In re Interest of T.C., 492 N.W.2d 425, 428–29 (Iowa 1992) (finding father was not denied his due process rights at child-in-need-of-assistance (CINA) adjudicatory hearing due t......
  • J.P., In Interest of, No. 92-1328
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Iowa
    • 23 d2 Fevereiro d2 1993
    ...the Iowa Supreme Court chose to terminate appellant's parental rights rather than place the child in long-term foster care. In re T.C., 492 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa Child custody should be quickly fixed and little disturbed. These children have been living in foster care for [one and one-half years......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT