Opinion ID: 1583123
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether Grandparents are Entitled to Court-Appointed Attorneys in a Termination Action

Text: Grandparents do not have a statutory right to an attorney in a termination action. Under section 232.113 of the Iowa Code, only the parent and child identified in the termination petition have a right to counsel. Snell was not identified as a parent of the children in the termination action at issue. Instead, she is the children's grandparent who intervened. She plainly was not entitled to court appointed counsel under section 232.113. Moreover, we have never held grandparents have a constitutional right to an attorney under these circumstances. See State Pub. Defender v. Iowa Dist. Ct., 721 N.W.2d 570, 574 (Iowa 2006) (explaining when an attorney is constitutionally required, the state is obligated to pay the court-appointed attorney reasonable compensation). Nor are we asked here to determine whether such a right exists. Nevertheless, in the past we have at least insinuated a court may have inherent power to appoint an attorney where there is neither a statutory right nor a constitutional right to such an appointment. See id. at 573 (stating [a]lthough the legislature no longer permits guardians ad litem for parents to be paid from the indigent defense fund, this change does not prohibit the court from appointing guardians ad litem for parents); Larson v. Bennett, 160 N.W.2d 303, 306 (Iowa 1968) (vesting in the trial court the discretion of appointing counsel when the facts in a particular [habeas corpus] case make such appointment desirable). However, even if that power exists, which we need not decide here, it does not carry with it the power to order the state to compensate counsel thus appointed. Maghee v. State, 639 N.W.2d 28, 31 (Iowa 2002). Therefore, the State Public Defender is not required to pay Amsler simply because the juvenile court appointed her.