IN RE WATKINS MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of STEPHANIE ANN LATONIA
COOK, ANTHONY JOHN JONES, TAMARAMINNIE CRAYOLA-GERALDINE WATKINS,
and MINARINA-BILL JALESSA STEPHANIE
LATRINA WATKINS, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
July 20, 2004
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 251546
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 01-401039
ANGELINE TAMARA JONES,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JAMES ANTHONY WATKINS, DAVID
WRIGHT, and STEPHEN COOK,
Respondents.
In the Matter of TAMARA-MINNIE GRAYLOR
GERALDINE WATKINS and MINARINA-BILL
JALESSA STEPHANIE LATRINA WATKINS,
Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 251637
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 01-401039
JAMES ANTHONY WATKINS,
Respondent-Appellant,
-1-
and
ANGELINE TAMARA JONES and STEPHEN
COOK,
Respondents.
Before: Murphy, P.J., and Griffin and White, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, respondents Angeline Tamara Jones and James Anthony
Watkins appeal as of right from an order terminating their parental rights to their children
pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii), (c)(i), (g ), and (j). We affirm.
In order to terminate parental rights, the trial court must find that at least one of the
statutory grounds for termination in MCL 712A.19b(3) has been met by clear and convincing
evidence. In re McIntyre, 192 Mich App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991). This Court reviews the
trial court’s findings under the clearly erroneous standard. MCR 3.977(J); In re Trejo Minors,
462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d
161 (1989). This Court gives due regard to the trial court’s unique ability to assess the
witnesses’ credibility. Id.
The trial court erred in terminating respondents’ parental rights under § 19b(3)(b)(ii),
failure to protect children from abuse, because the evidence of past abuse was too vague to
satisfy this provision by clear and convincing evidence. However, only a single statutory ground
for termination is required. In re Sours Minors, 459 Mich 624, 632; 593 NW2d 520 (1999).
There was ample evidence to establish that termination was warranted under §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (g),
and (j).
The evidence established that respondent Jones failed to resolve the substance abuse and
domestic violence problems that led to the children’s adjudication as court wards. She continued
to test positive for drug use, and she continued to excuse and tolerate respondent Watkins’
violent conduct toward her. She failed to appreciate her children’s special needs, hindered
Stephanie’s mental health treatment, and failed to understand the most basic aspects of
addressing Stephanie’s and Anthony’s special needs. Her failure to understand these children’s
needs is probative of how she would treat the younger children if they were in her care. In re
Powers, 208 Mich App 582, 588-589; 528 NW2d 799 (1995).
The evidence established that Watkins failed to resolve his substance abuse problem and
tested positive for cocaine five times during the pendency of the termination hearing. He failed
to benefit from domestic violence treatment and casually excused his most recent episode of
violence as a “mistake.” He failed to establish an independent plan for providing for the children
apart from Jones. By his own admission, he has a history of failing to provide support for his
eight other children.
-2-
With respect to both respondents, the evidence did not show that termination of their
parental rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5).
Affirmed.
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Helene N. White
-3-
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.
