Opinion
No. 2-757 / 02-1330
Filed October 16, 2002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karla J. Fultz, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Christine Bisignano, West Des Moines, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, and Jennifer Galloway, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Michael Sorci, Youth Law Center, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Considered by Hecht, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Carl S., Sr. appeals the termination of his parental rights to his ten-year-old son, Carl Jr. He contends there was insufficient evidence to support termination and termination was not in the child's best interests. On our de novo review, we disagree.
The juvenile court terminated Carl Sr.'s parental rights on three separate statutory grounds. When the juvenile court relies on more than one statutory ground, we may affirm if there is evidence to support any one of the cited grounds. In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999). We find clear and convincing evidence to support termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1) (e) (Supp. 2001) (parent has not maintained significant and meaningful contact with the child).
This provision was formerly Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d).
Carl Sr. was incarcerated in 1995 or 1996 for sexually abusing a former girlfriend's five-year-old daughter. He testified at the termination hearing that he had not seen his son since that time, with the exception of several jailhouse visits when he was first taken into custody. He also testified that he did not expect to be discharged until five months after the termination hearing. Given the absence of personal contact between father and son for at least six years, we conclude termination is warranted under section 232.116(1)(e). For the same reason, we conclude termination is in Carl Jr.'s best interests.