IN RE TABITHA ATKINS-LINK MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of T.A.L., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 2, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 230724
Genesee Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 89-082737-NA
KEITH R. LINK,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Doctoroff, P.J., and Wilder and Chad C. Schmucker*, 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)(b)(i), (k)(ii) and (n)(i). We affirm.
Respondent failed to properly preserve his evidentiary arguments for appeal. Matter of
King, 186 Mich App 458, 465; 465 NW2d 1 (1990). Regardless, any error in admission of the
therapist’s opinion, reliance on the child-victim’s statements to her, or the court’s comments in
its opinion were clearly harmless where the record was replete with evidence that would lead any
rational fact finder to the conclusion that termination was in the child’s best interests and that
respondent’s predatory actions would likely harm his daughter for years to come. Moreover, the
trial court was not even required to make a finding regarding the child’s best interests. In re
Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 352; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Furthermore, Detective Bade’s testimony
regarding the evidence seized from respondent’s home pursuant to a search warrant was, in itself,
corroborative of the child’s statements to him about the sexual abuse perpetrated by respondent.
See Matter of Brimmer, 191 Mich App 401, 406-407; 478 NW2d 689 (1991). Lastly, respondent
has failed to demonstrate that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. People v
Stanaway, 446 Mich 643, 687-688; 521 NW2d 557 (1994). The family court, therefore, did not
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1-
err in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the child.
Affirmed.
/s/ Martin M. Doctoroff
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
/s/ Chad C. Schmucker
-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.
