IN RE DA'MARION TONIRUS MELTON MINOR

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of DOMINIC THOMAS MELTON, Minors. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, UNPUBLISHED August 26, 2008 Petitioner-Appellee, V No. 284065 Macomb Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 2007-000211-NA TONA MELTON, Respondent-Appellant, and DEQUAN HOUSER, Respondent. In the Matter of DKWON TIMOTHY MELTON, Minor. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, V No. 284066 Macomb Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 2007-000212-NA TONA MELTON, Respondent-Appellant, and DEQUAN HOUSER, -1- Respondent. In the Matter of DENAJAY TAITIANNA MELTON, Minor. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 284067 Macomb Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 2007-000213-NA TONA MELTON, Respondent-Appellant, and DEQUAN HOUSER, Respondent. In the Matter of DELAINEA TONARIA MELTON, Minor. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, No. 284068 Macomb Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 2007-000214-NA v TONA MELTON, Respondent-Appellant, and DEQUAN HOUSER, Respondent. In the Matter of DA’MARION TONIRUS MELTON, Minor. -2- DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, V No. 284069 Macomb Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 2007-000215-NA TONA MELTON, Respondent-Appellant, and DEQUAN HOUSER, Respondent. Before: Cavanagh, P.J., and Jansen and Kelly, JJ. PER CURIAM. Respondent Tona Melton appeals as of right from the order terminating her parental rights to the minor children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j). We affirm. These appeals have been decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). The trial court did not clearly err in finding that clear and convincing evidence established the statutory grounds for termination of respondent’s parental rights. In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 355; 612 NW2d 407 (2000); In re Sours, 459 Mich 624, 633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999); MCR 3.977(J). The condition that led to adjudication was respondent’s failure to provide proper care for her children. Respondent argues that because she was complying with the parent agency agreement, this condition no longer existed. At the time of trial, respondent had undergone a psychological evaluation, had obtained housing and a legal source of income but had not completed parenting classes or therapy. Respondent’s partial compliance with the parent agency agreement was not sufficient to rectify the condition that led to adjudication. In re Jackson, 199 Mich App 22, 27; 501 NW2d 182 (1993). Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that the conditions that led to adjudication continued to exist. Respondent also contends that it was reasonable to find that she would have completed the parent agency agreement within another six months, and thus there was a reasonable likelihood that the condition would be rectified within a reasonable time. The determination of what is a reasonable time under this subsection includes both how long it will take for the parent to improve the conditions and how long the children can wait for the improvement. In re Dahms,187 Mich App 644, 648; 468 NW2d 315 (1991). These children had been in care for -3- almost a year at the time of the termination hearing, and respondent still had to complete therapy sessions and parenting classes to address her parenting skills. Based on such evidence, we find that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that there was no reasonable likelihood that the condition would be rectified within a reasonable time considering the children’s ages. Thus, termination was warranted under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i). Respondent’s failure to comply with the parent agency agreement was evidence of her failure to provide proper care. In re Trejo, supra at 360-363. The same evidence establishing that the condition of adjudication would not be rectified within a reasonable time establishes that respondent is unlikely to be able to provide proper care and custody within a reasonable time. In addition, respondent’s failure to fully address her parenting skills and her depressive symptoms posed a risk of harm to the children. Thus, termination warranted under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) and (j). Furthermore, the evidence did not establish that the children’s best interests precluded termination of respondent-appellant’s parental rights. In re Trejo, supra at 353; MCL 712A.19b(5). Although there was testimony that the children loved respondent and that there was a bond between the older children and respondent, these children needed a stable, safe, and permanent environment in which to live, which respondent was not ready to provide. While respondent had housing and had a legal source of income, she had not fully addressed her parenting skills by completing parenting classes and therapy sessions during the pendency of this case. Affirmed. /s/ Mark J. Cavanagh /s/ Kathleen Jansen /s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly -4-

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.