IN RE DEVLIN LEE HATFIELD MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of DEVLIN HATFIELD, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
May 13, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
JESSICA LYNN HATFIELD and TIMOTHY
ALLEN HATFIELD, JR.,
No. 282512
Barry Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 06-007418-NA
Respondents-Appellants.
Before: Donofrio, P.J., and Sawyer and Murphy, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondents appeal as of right from a circuit court order terminating their parental rights
to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19(3)(c)(i) and (g). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination
were established by clear and convincing evidence. In re Archer, 277 Mich App 71, 73; 744
NW2d 1 (2007). The child came into care because respondents neglected his medical needs,
which included failing to take him to doctor’s appointments, and because they failed to maintain
safe and sanitary housing. Although there was conflicting testimony on the state of respondents’
home, the trial court resolved this issue in favor of petitioner’s witnesses, and this Court defers to
the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility. MCR 2.613(C). The testimony also showed
that respondents lacked reliable transportation and used that as an excuse for not participating in
activities under the service plan; however, they could have arranged for transportation with
others, including the agency, but failed to take advantage of the available assistance. They had
no means of supporting a child.
Further, the evidence on the whole record did not clearly show that termination of
respondent’s parental rights was not in the child’s best interests. In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 354,
356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000); MCL 712A.19b(5). The trial court did not clearly err in
terminating respondents’ parental rights to the child. In re Trejo, supra at 356-357.
Affirmed.
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ William B. Murphy
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.
