In re C.M., Jr.

Summary

The Iowa Supreme Court held that expedited appellate procedures for termination-of-parental-rights cases, including the use of a petition on appeal instead of full briefing, do not violate equal protection or procedural due process. The court also rejected the mother's ineffective-assistance claim based on counsel's failure to challenge those procedures. The court affirmed the court of appeals and the juvenile court's judgment.

Holdings

1. The mother's constitutional challenges to the appellate procedures were not preserved because she did not raise them in her petition on appeal after the procedures became applicable.
2. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the expedited appellate procedures because the constitutional challenges lacked merit; therefore, the mother could not avoid the preservation requirement through an ineffective-assistance claim.
3. The expedited appellate procedure for termination-of-parental-rights cases does not violate equal protection, even assuming the more demanding strict-scrutiny standard applies.
4. The expedited appellate procedure does not violate the mother's procedural due process rights under the federal or Iowa Constitutions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Iowa's expedited appellate procedures for termination-of-parental-rights cases, including the use of a petition on appeal instead of mandatory full briefing, violate equal protection.
2. Whether those expedited appellate procedures violate procedural due process under the United States and Iowa Constitutions.
3. Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to preserve the constitutional challenges to the appellate procedures.

Disposition

affirmed