IN RE DONJA LADDIE WHITE MOORE MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of D.L.W.M., Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
August 21, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 284354
Saginaw Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 07-031330-NA
JACQUELINE DENISE MOORE,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
DONJA WHITE,
Respondent.
Before: Cavanagh, P.J., and Jansen and Kelly, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent Jacqueline Moore appeals as of right from a circuit court order terminating
her parental rights to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(i) and (l). We affirm.
Respondent’s parental rights were terminated at the original dispositional hearing. The
trial court found that the allegations in the petition were true and established both a basis for
assuming jurisdiction and for terminating parental rights, see MCR 3.977(E), and respondent
does not contest those findings.
The trial court further found that termination of respondent’s parental rights was not
clearly contrary to the child’s best interests. That determination is not clearly erroneous. See
MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 354, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). The child
was an infant who had an immediate need for a stable home and a responsible caretaker.
Respondent had a history of substance abuse and criminal activity resulting in the termination of
her parental rights to seven other children. Respondent’s history showed that she was not a
responsible parent and her present circumstances indicated that nothing had changed; she was
unable to meet her child’s needs because she was incarcerated for a pending criminal charge and
there was no indication when that charge might be resolved. Further, the child had no bond to
-1-
respondent and did not know her as his mother. Under the circumstances, the trial court did not
err in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the child. See In re Trejo, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/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.
