Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re M.M.

Court of Appeals of Iowa

July 5, 2018

IN THE INTEREST OF M.M., Minor Child, J.M., Father, Appellant.

          Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District Associate Judge.

         A father appeals a child-in-need-of-assistance permanency order continuing his child's removal from his home. AFFIRMED.

          David Barajas of Macro & Kozlowski, L.L.P., West Des Moines, for appellant father.

          Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Mary A. Triick, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State.

          Brent M. Pattison of Drake Legal Clinic, Des Moines, guardian ad litem for minor child.

          Considered by Potterfield, P.J., Tabor, J. and Mahan, S.J.[*]

          MAHAN, SENIOR JUDGE.

         A father appeals a child-in-need-of-assistance permanency order continuing his child's removal from his home. Upon our review, we affirm the juvenile court's order.

         I. Background Facts and Proceedings

         M.M., born in 2007, has a history of sexually abusing his younger brother.[1]This family again came to the attention of the department of human services (DHS) in February 2017, when M.M. ran away from the mother's home after she confronted him about reoffending. DHS entered a founded report for denial of critical care, failure to provide proper supervision, against the mother. The mother agreed to M.M. residing with the father while he received services. DHS entered a safety plan disallowing M.M. from having unsupervised contact with any other children.

         In April 2017, the court entered an order formally removing M.M. from the mother's custody and placing him with the father. An adjudication order was entered in June 2017 adjudicating M.M. a child in need of assistance (CINA).[2] A July dispositional order continued M.M.'s placement with the father.

         The mother moved to Arizona with M.M.'s younger half-siblings in August.[3]A September Family Safety, Risk, and Permanency Services progress report stated:

[The father] continues to keep [M.M.] safe. [The father] gets [M.M.] to school on time, takes him to therapy weekly and also takes him to football every day after school. [The father] has been looking for a job during this reporting period. He reports he does not have any issues with [M.M.] at home and he is doing well at school.

         An October letter from M.M.'s therapy provider indicated the child "has been very engaged in therapy" and "has progressed well." An October review order ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.