IN RE DASHON TAYLOR MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of DASHON TAYLOR, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
August 19, 2004
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 254223
Calhoun Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-002898-NA
TONIA TAYLOR,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
DWAYNE BOWIE,
Respondent.
Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Cooper and Kelly, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds were established by
clear and convincing evidence. MCR 3.977(J); In re Sours Minors, 459 Mich 624, 633; 593
NW2d 520 (1999); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Dashon was
removed from respondent-appellant when he was approximately fourteen months old.
Respondent-appellant admitted to allegations that she was homeless, emotionally unstable, and
used marijuana. Although the child had been in foster care for more than sixteen months at the
time of the termination hearing, respondent-appellant had only recently acquired suitable housing
and did not consistently comply with counseling. Respondent-appellant admitted at the
termination hearing that she was not regularly taking her medication that had been prescribed to
treat her depression. Moreover, respondent-appellant had not completed substance abuse
treatment, did not consistently comply with drug screens, and had tested positive for marijuana
throughout most of the proceedings. In addition, respondent-appellant maintained that using
marijuana did not affect her parenting ability.
-1-
Further, the evidence failed to show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental
rights was clearly not in the best interests of the child. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo Minors,
462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Dashon had spent more than half of his young
life in foster care waiting for respondent-appellant to become an appropriate parent. Therefore,
the trial court did not err in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights.
Affirmed.
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
/s/ Jessica R. Cooper
/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
-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.
