IN RE CYRIAL LICHELE PASSMORE MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of CYRIAL LICHELE PASSMORE,
Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
October 28, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 283554
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 03-417718-NA
ALICIA PASSMORE,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Wilder, P.J., and Jansen and Owens, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Respondent appeals by right the trial court order terminating her parental rights to the
minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), and (g). We affirm.
Respondent contends that the trial court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence to
support the statutory grounds for termination. We disagree. On appeal from termination of
parental rights proceedings, this Court reviews the trial court’s findings under the clearly
erroneous standard. MCR 3.977(J); In re Sours, 459 Mich 624, 633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999); In
re Gazella, 264 Mich App 668, 672; 692 NW2d 708 (2005). In order to terminate parental
rights, the trial court must find that at least one of the statutory grounds for termination in MCL
712A.19b(3) has been met by clear and convincing evidence. In re McIntyre, 192 Mich App 47,
50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991).
The trial court did not err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were
established by clear and convincing evidence. When this case was adjudicated, respondent was
living in a shelter, had no income, and had abandoned her child. Five years later, respondent did
not have suitable housing for her minor child. She had just started a new job on a probationary
period and had a five-year history of not keeping a job for more than a month or two. Finally,
her failure to maintain visitation with her child and maintain the parent-child bond was, in
essence, an abandonment of that child. Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in finding
sufficient evidence to conclude that the conditions that led to the adjudication continued to exist
and, after five years of noncompliance with the treatment plan, there was no reasonable
likelihood that they would be rectified within a reasonable time. MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i). The
same evidence established respondent’s past inability or unwillingness to provide proper care
-1-
and custody and that there was no reasonable expectation that she would be able to provide
proper care and custody within a reasonable time considering the child’s age. MCL
712A.19b(3)(g).
We reject respondent’s argument that her parental rights were terminated because she
was penalized for being too poor to obtain stable housing. The termination of respondent’s
parental rights was not based solely on housing and income. Rather, the trial court focused on
respondent’s inconsistent and infrequent visitation record, which demonstrated a lack of
commitment and resulted in the loss of the parent-child bond.
Finally, we find that the trial court did not clearly err in holding that termination of
respondent’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest. MCL 712A. 19b(5); In re Trejo, 462
Mich 341, 353; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Respondent had never demonstrated a commitment to
the child by substantial compliance with the treatment plan, especially in her failure to regularly
visit the child. As a result of five years of infrequent contact, the parent-child bond had been
lost. Therefore, the record provides clear and convincing evidence to support the trial court’s
finding that termination was in the child’s best interests.
Affirmed.
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/s/ Donald S. Owens
-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.
