IN RE STEVEN STRIBLING MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of MICHAEL STRIBLING, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
November 25, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 285433
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2007-000253-NA
WILLIAM M. STRIBLING,
Respondent-Appellant.
In the Matter of JESSE STRIBLING, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 285434
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2007-000254-NA
WILLIAM M. STRIBLING,
Respondent-Appellant.
In the Matter of DANIEL STRIBLING, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 285435
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2007-000255-NA
WILLIAM M. STRIBLING,
Respondent-Appellant.
-1-
In the Matter of STEVEN STRIBLING, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 285436
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2007-000256-NA
WILLIAM M. STRIBLING,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Murphy, P.J., and Sawyer and Smolenski, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In these consolidated appeals, respondent appeals as of right from a circuit court order
terminating his parental rights to the minor children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(a)(ii), (c)(i),
(c)(ii), (g), and (j). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that §§ 19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(ii), (g), and (j) were
each established by clear and convincing evidence.1 In re Archer, 277 Mich App 71, 73; 744
NW2d 1 (2007). Respondent had a substance abuse problem and other issues that affected his
parenting. He made minimal efforts to participate in services and rarely visited the children.
After testing positive for cocaine, respondent abandoned the service plan altogether and never
visited the children again.
Further, the evidence did not clearly show that termination of respondent’s parental rights
was not in the children’s best interests. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 354; 612 NW2d 407
(2000); MCL 712A.19b(5).2 Therefore, the court did not clearly err in terminating respondent’s
parental rights to the children. In re Trejo, supra at 356-357.
Affirmed.
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ Michael R. Smolenski
1
Accordingly, any error in relying on § 19b(3)(c)(i) as an additional statutory ground for
termination was harmless. In re Powers Minors, 244 Mich App 111, 118; 624 NW2d 472 (2000).
2
Pursuant to an amendment of MCL 712A.19b(5) by the Legislature in 2008 PA 199, a trial
court must now find, in addition to a statutory ground for termination, “that termination of
parental rights is in the child’s best interests.” This amendment was made effective July 11,
2008, which is after the date of termination in the case at bar.
-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.
