IN RE JAMES GUY MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of JAMES GUY, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
May 18, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 227510
Calhoun Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-004139-NA
ROY LEE GUY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
DONETTA NEWELL,
Respondent.
Before: McDonald, P.J., and Smolenski and K. F. Kelly, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the family court order terminating his
parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(e), (g) and (j); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(e), (g) and (j). We affirm.
Although appellant argues that the trial court erred in terminating his parental rights at the
initial dispositional hearing, the court rules expressly permit that practice. MCR 5.974(D).
Applying that court rule, we hold that the trial court did not err in terminating appellant’s
parental rights at the initial disposition where: (1) the petition contained a proper request for
termination, (2) the court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the child came under the
jurisdiction of the trial court, and (3) the trial court did not clearly err in finding, by clear and
convincing evidence, that one or more facts alleged in the petition were true, justified termination
of parental rights, and fell under MCL 712A.19b(3)(e), (g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(e),
(g) and (j).
The trial court did not clearly err in finding a statutory basis for termination, given
appellant’s lengthy criminal history, multiple incidents of domestic violence, long-standing drug
-1-
and alcohol abuse, long-term failure to parent the child, and failure to comply with the courtordered plan developed as part of the guardianship proceeding. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich
341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Further, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that
the evidence did not show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental rights was clearly
not in the child’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re Trejo
Minors, supra at 344. Accordingly, the trial court was required to terminate respondent’s
parental rights. Id.
Affirmed.
/s/ Gary R. McDonald
/s/ Michael R. Smolenski
/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
-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.
