IN RE SAMARA JONES MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
__________________________________________
In the Matter of TIA JONES, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
July 17, 1998
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
SANDRA JONES,
No. 203924
Muskegon Juvenile Court
LC No. 91-018482 NA
Respondent-Appellant,
and
STEPHON EVANS,
Respondent.
In the Matter of SAMARA JONES, MARQUIS
JONES and ASHLEY WATSON, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
SANDRA JONES,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
No. 205115
Muskegon Juvenile Court
LC No. 91-018482 NA
MARK POLLARD, BRETT FLOWERS and
NATHAN WATSON,
Respondents.
Before: Murphy, P.J., and Young, Jr. and Michael R. Smith*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In docket no. 203924, respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the juvenile court order
terminating her parental rights to Tia Jones under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i). In docket no. 205115, respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the
juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to Samara Jones, Marquis Jones and Ashley Watson
under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i). We affirm. This case is being
decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The juvenile court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory ground for termination was
established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445
NW2d 161 (1989). Further, respondent-appellant failed to show that termination of her parental rights
was clearly not in the children’s best interests. In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 472-473; 564
NW2d 156 (1997). Thus, the juvenile court did not err in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental
rights to the children. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5).
Affirmed.
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ Robert P. Young, Jr.
/s/ Michael R. Smith
*
Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.