IN RE ELLIS AND MCKINNEY MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of J.E., J.E., S.E., J.E., S.E., and J.M., Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED December 17, 2002 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 236840 St. Clair Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 98-004950-NA CASSANDRA L. ELLIS, Respondent-Appellant, and SHANTE ELLIS and MIKE MCKINNEY, Respondents. Before: Owens, P.J., and Murphy and Cavanagh, 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), (c)(ii), (g), 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 clear and convincing evidence supported the termination of respondent-appellant’s parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(ii), (g), and (j). See In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Although she was in compliance with all court orders, there was evidence that respondent-appellant failed to acknowledge the children’s concerns and needs, that she failed to protect them from sexual behavior occurring between the siblings, and that the children’s emotional states deteriorated after unsupervised visits. The evidence revealed that the children loved their mother but that they feared being returned to her care on a permanent basis. The children were in foster care for close to three years and had been involved with Protective Services for most of their young lives, yet significant problems continued to exist at the time of trial. Although the court erred in finding that the conditions that led to the adjudication, unsuitable housing and excessive absenteeism from school, continued to exist, petitioner needed -1- to establish only one of the statutory grounds for termination. See In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 350; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). After reviewing the record, we cannot conclude that the trial court clearly erred in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(ii), (g), and (j). Affirmed. /s/ Donald S. Owens /s/ William B. Murphy /s/ Mark J. Cavanagh -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.