IN RE DONLEY & JOHNSON MINORS, ET AL
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of CMD, a/k/a CMJ, JTJ, DNJ, JR.,
and JSJ, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
March 30, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 229862
St. Joseph Circuit Court
Juvenile Division
LC No. 98-000162-NA
SAMANTHA JOHNSON,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JOHN DONLEY and DAVID JOHNSON,
Respondents.
Before: Doctoroff, P.J., and Holbrook, Jr. and Hoekstra, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals by right from the juvenile court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) and (j); MSA
27A.3178(598.19b)(3)(g) and (j). We affirm.
We conclude from a review of the record that the trial court did not clearly err in finding
that the above-referenced subsections were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR
5.974(I); In re Vasquez, 199 Mich App 44, 51; 501 NW2d 231 (1993). The record shows that
respondent has a history of being unable to properly care for her children and to provide them
with a stable home environment. Respondent had been in jail for over nine months after the
current petition was filed, during which time she could not care for her children. Respondent
admittedly has a history of cocaine use and sold drugs from her house when the children were
living with her. The caseworker testified that respondent had no stable housing and that
respondent has not kept in touch. The caseworker stated that she has experienced difficulty
locating respondent, and respondent never returned the calls that the caseworker made to the
-1-
phone numbers provided by respondent. The two younger children’s therapist testified that the
children suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, with one of the children exhibiting severe
symptoms, including an attempt to hang himself. The therapist stated that respondent is a trigger
to the children’s problems, and that terminating respondent’s parental rights is in the children’s
best interests.
Although respondent made efforts to “straighten up,” we cannot conclude that the court
clearly erred in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the four minor children under these
circumstances. In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). To the extent that
respondent claims that the holding of Trejo was not complied with, we find no clear error.
Affirmed.
/s/ Martin M. Doctoroff
/s/ Donald E. Holbrook, Jr.
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
-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.
