IN RE SPENCER/GARVIN MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of CANDISE YVONNE SPENCER, BRIANNA DAWN SPENCER, CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY SPENCER, Jr., ALONZO MILTON GARVIN, DARCHELLE RENA GARVIN and GLADYS MARIA GARVIN, Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED July 11, 2000 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 222711 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 98-370252 RACHEL YVONNE SPENCER, Respondent-Appellant, and CHRIS COLLINS, BRYANT D. BRANCH and MILTON GARVIN, Respondents. Before: Jansen, P.J., and Hood and Saad, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent Rachel Spencer appeals as of right the order terminating her parental rights to her six children. We affirm. Respondent’s parental rights were terminated pursuant to MCL 712A.19(3); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3). Termination was made under subsection (a)(ii) (desertion), (c)(i), (failure to remedy conditions), (g), (failure to provide proper care and custody), and (j) (likelihood of harm). Evidence presented at the termination hearing showed that the children were made temporary court -1­ wards based on the conditions of the home, and that respondent failed to improve the conditions or comply with her treatment plan. A trial court’s decision terminating parental rights is reviewed for clear error. In re Sours Minors, 459 Mich 624, 632; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). If the court finds statutory grounds of termination were established by clear and convincing evidence, it must terminate parental rights unless the respondent shows that termination is clearly not in the children’s best interest. In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 472; 654 NW2d 156 (1997). There was clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of respondent’s parental rights. The conditions that triggered the filing of the petition still existed at the time of the termination. Where respondent failed to comply with the treatment plan, there was no showing of a reasonable likelihood that the conditions would be corrected in a reasonable time. Respondent failed to make progress with her problems, and she failed to provide proper care and custody for the children. Given the conditions, the court could conclude that the children would be harmed if they were returned to respondent. The trial court did not clearly err in terminating respondent’s parental rights. Affirmed. /s/ Kathleen Jansen /s/ Harold Hood /s/ Henry William Saad -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.