IN RE CRUZ & SOLIS MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of JESSIE CRUZ, AUGOSTINA SOLIS and ROUDEL SOLIS, Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED April 30, 1999 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 214012 Van Buren Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 96-010647 MARIA L. VALERIO, Respondent-Appellant, and JOSE CRUZ and JUAN SOLIS, Respondents. Before: Kelly, P.J., Neff and Smolenski, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the family court order terminating her parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii) and (g); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(a)(ii) and (g). We affirm. This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). The family court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were 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. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 472-473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997). Thus, the family court did not err in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights to the children. Id. -1­ Respondent-appellant’s claim that her plea of admission was not an understanding or voluntary one is not preserved for appeal because she did not move to withdraw her plea in the family court. In re Campbell, 170 Mich App 243, 249; 428 NW2d 347 (1988). In any event, the record indicates that respondent-appellant’s plea was knowingly, understandingly and voluntarily made. MCR 5.971(B) and (C). The family court did not err in admitting and relying on the foster care worker’s testimony at the initial dispositional hearing. MCR 5.973(A)(4)(a); In re Snyder, 223 Mich App 85, 88-89, 566 NW2d 18 (1997). Affirmed. /s/ Michael J. Kelly /s/ Janet T. Neff /s/ Michael R. Smolenski -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.