IN RE CIERA & NEFETERA MOORE MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of ALISA CRAYTON, a/k/a ALISHA
CRAYTON, WILLIE CRAYTON, JR., CARLETTA
HOLLIDAY, CIERA MOORE and NEFETERA
MOORE, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
May 25, 1999
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 213605
Berrien Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 96-000082 NA
VELMA HOLLIDAY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
WILLIE CRAYTON, TIMOTHY THOMPSON and
OZELL MOORE,
Respondents.
In the Matter of CIERA MOORE and NEFETERA
MOORE, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 214220
Berrien Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 96-000082 NA
OZELL MOORE,
-1
-2
Respondent-Appellant,
and
VELMA HOLLIDAY,
Respondent.
Before: Griffin, P.J., and Cavanagh and Fitzgerald, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In Docket No. 213605, respondent Velma Holliday appeals by delayed leave granted the
family court order terminating her parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii),
(c)(i), (c)(ii), (g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (c)(ii), (g) and (j). In Docket No.
214220, respondent Ozell Moore appeals as of right the family court order terminating his parental
rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i), (g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(b)(i), (g) and (j). 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 with respect to both respondents. MCR 5.974(I); In re
Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Further, respondents failed to show that
termination of their 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, 473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997).
Thus, the family court did not err in terminating respondents’ parental rights to the children. Id.
Finally, respondent Holliday has not shown that she was denied her right to the effective
assistance of counsel. People v Pickens, 446 Mich 298, 309; 521 NW2d 797 (1994); In re Simon,
171 Mich App 443, 447; 431 NW2d 71 (1988).
Affirmed.
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
-3
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.
