IN RE NUNN/JOHNSON-RAY/JOHNSON MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of MLD, DSJR, KYJ, TAJ, and KKJ,
Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
December 7, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
V
No. 231342
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 98-363010
DEWANNA JOHNSON,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
ANTHONY JOHNSON, RONNIE CHARLES
RAY and MARK NUNN,
Respondents.
Before: White, P.J., and Talbot and E.R. Post,* JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), (h) 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
found in MCL 712A.19(3)(c)(i) and (g) were established by clear and convincing evidence.
MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Only one ground need
be shown. Further the evidence did not show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental
rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo Minors,
462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Thus, the trial court did not err in terminating
respondent-appellant’s parental rights to the children.
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1-
Respondent also argues that she received ineffective assistance of counsel because her
attorney did not offer additional evidence relative to her incarceration and expected release date.
The documents respondent argues should have been admitted were relevant to termination
pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(h). The trial court terminated parental rights on several grounds,
including this one. We have already determined that termination was proper under subsections
19b(3)(c)(i) and (g). Because only one statutory ground is required to terminate parental rights,
In re Trejo, supra at 350, it is unreasonable to conclude that counsel’s failure to offer certain
documents to prevent termination under subsection 19b(3)(h) affected the outcome of the case.
Affirmed.
/s/ Helene N. White
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
/s/ Edward R. Post
-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.
