IN RE JAWAUNE DEMETRIUS HAYES IV MINOR

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of JAWAUNE DEMETRIUS HAYES, Minor. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED February 8, 2000 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 218964 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 91-296673 SHEMEKA MICHELLE REED, Respondent-Appellant, and DANNY DEMETRIUS HAYES, Respondent. Before: O’Connell, P.J., and Meter and T. G. Hicks*, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the order terminating her parental rights to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(g) and (j). We affirm. This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). The trial 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 311, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). We reject respondent-appellant’s claim that petitioner failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite her with her child. The juvenile code requires only that petitioner offer services that will facilitate reunification and any additional services the court may order. MCL 712A.18f; MSA 27.3178(598.18f); MSA 712A.19; MSA 27.3178(598.19). In this case, the record indicates that * Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment. -1­ respondent-appellant was repeatedly offered a myriad of services over a period in excess of five years, dating back to when her three oldest children were taken into custody. She failed to take advantage of many of the services offered over the years and did not significantly benefit from the services that she did employ. Finally, respondent-appellant failed to show that termination of her parental rights was clearly not in the child’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re HallSmith, 222 Mich App 470, 472-473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997). Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights to the child. Id. at 472. Affirmed. /s/ Peter D. O’Connell /s/ Patrick M. Meter /s/ Timothy G. Hicks -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.