IN RE JASMINE MCDONALD-BUTLER MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of Jasmine McDonald-Butler, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
March 25, 2004
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 251622
Ottawa Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-041598-na
HOWARD EUGENE BUTLER,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JAIMIE McDONALD,
Respondent.
Before: Zahra, P.J., and Saad and Schuette, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Respondent Howard Butler appeals by delayed leave granted the order terminating his
parental rights to Jasmine McDonald-Butler. We affirm.
I. FACTS
Jasmine entered foster care after she was left for an extended period of time with friends
of her mother. Her mother had serious drug problems. Respondent visited Jasmine sporadically
before she entered foster care and was on parole for uttering and publishing. After Jasmine
entered foster care, respondent rarely visited her and was arrested for manufacturing
methamphetamine and fleeing and eluding, as well as parole violations. Respondent was then
incarcerated and his earliest release date was May 29, 2005. Due to respondent’s failure to
cooperate with caseworkers, his minimal involvement with Jasmine, his criminal activity and
incarceration the court terminated respondent’s parental rights.
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Under MCL 712A.19b(3), the petitioner for the termination of parental rights bears the
burden of proving at least one ground for termination. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341; 617
-1-
NW2d 407 (2000). Once the petitioner has presented clear and convincing evidence that
persuades the court that a ground for termination is established, termination of parental rights is
mandatory unless the court finds that termination is clearly not in the child’s best interests. Id,
355-356. Decisions terminating parental rights are reviewed for clear error. Id, 356.
III. ANALYSIS
The petition alleged that respondent failed to rectify conditions leading to the petition and
failed to provide proper care and custody. MCL 712A.19b(3) provides for termination when
(c)
The parent was a respondent in a proceeding brought under this
chapter, 182 or more days have elapsed since the issuance of tan initial
dispositional order, and the court, by clear and convincing evidence, finds either
of the following:
(i)
The conditions that led to the adjudication continue to exist and
there is no reasonable likelihood that the conditions will be rectified within a
reasonable time considering the child’s age.
* * *
(g)
The parent, without regard to intent, fails to provide proper care or
custody for the child and there is no reasonable expectation that the parent will be
able to provide proper care and custody within a reasonable time considering the
child’s age.
There is clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of respondent’s
parental rights. Respondent failed to cooperate with the caseworker and he offered no evidence
that he could rectify the conditions that led to the adjudication or provide proper care and
custody within a reasonable time. His involvement in his daughter’s life was minimal and there
was no reasonable basis for him to rely on the mother to provide proper care. There was no
evidence that he could provide proper care and custody within a reasonable time given the
child’s age.
Affirmed.
/s/ Brian K. Zahra
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Bill Schuette
-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.
