IN RE GABRIELLE COLE MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of JAYLEN RAPHAEL FELIX,
Minor.
MAYSSA ATTIA,
UNPUBLISHED
March 8, 2007
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 271527
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2005-060333-NA
JOHNINE COLE,
Respondent-Appellant.
In the Matter of JACOB JAMAL FELIX, Minor.
MAYSSA ATTIA,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 271528
LC No. 2005-060334-NA
JOHNINE COLE,
Respondent-Appellant.
In the Matter of DANIELLE AMBER COLE,
Minor.
MAYSSA ATTIA,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 271529
LC No. 2005-060335-NA
JOHNINE COLE,
-1-
Respondent-Appellant.
In the Matter of GABRIELLE SKYYE COLE,
Minor.
MAYSSA ATTIA,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 271530
LC No. 2005-060336-NA
JOHNINE COLE,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Servitto, P.J., and Talbot and Schuette, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Respondent appeals as of right from the lower court order terminating her parental rights
to the four minor children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (e), (f), (g), (i), (j) and (l). We
affirm. These appeals are being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Respondent is the mother of seven children. She has a 20-year history of crack cocaine,
marijuana and alcohol abuse. In 1990, her parental rights to her oldest son were terminated. Her
oldest two daughters were raised, in part, by guardians. The four youngest children at issue in
this appeal have been in continual guardianships for at least a decade. Jaylen and Jacob have
lived with their paternal grandmother in Michigan since 1995. Gabrielle and Danielle, 16-yearold twins, were placed in the care of a guardian when they were 11 months old. When they were
seven years old, their paternal grandmother became the successor guardian and eventually
relocated with the twins to Arizona. Pursuant to the guardianships, a court structured plan was
developed which required certain actions on respondent’s part. Respondent was required, among
other things, to seek treatment for her substance abuse, obtain and maintain suitable income and
housing, participate in individual counseling and submit random drug screens.
Between approximately 2000 and 2004, respondent had virtually no contact with her
children. In 2005, she filed a petition in probate court to compel visitation and communication
with them. She was unable to attend the May 2005 hearing on the petition, however, because she
was jailed on outstanding warrants and child support arrearages. In respondent’s absence, the
petition was denied. Shortly thereafter, petitioner filed a petition seeking termination of
respondent’s parental rights. At the time of the termination hearing, respondent did not have
-2-
suitable housing or sufficient income. Although she claimed to have been clean and sober for
the previous 18 months, she had not been in drug treatment consistently, nor had she provided
random drug screens. Respondent had not emotionally or financially supported her children for
years. Furthermore, contact with the children had been disruptive. The twins had no desire to
pursue a relationship with respondent. In the past, the boys had behavioral issues following
contact with her and their special needs required that they be in a stable environment with
consistent parenting. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court granted the petition and
terminated respondent’s parental rights.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding a statutory basis for termination of
respondent’s parental rights given the above facts, which include longstanding drug and alcohol
abuse, long-term failure to parent her children, and failure to comply with the court structured
plan developed as part of the guardianship proceedings. MCR 3.977(J); In re Trejo, 462 Mich
341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Further, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that
there was no evidence that termination would not be in the children’s best interests. MCL
712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, supra at 344. Rather than being a source of comfort to the children,
respondent’s continued sporadic presence in the children’s lives was sure to cause turmoil,
confusion and upheaval.
Affirmed.
/s/ Deborah A. Servitto
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
/s/ Bill Schuette
-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.
