IN RE WORLEY/ESPINO MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of DAWN MERCEDES WORLEY,
MONICA WORLEY, THERESA OLIVIA
ALEXU ESPINO, MARIEA CLARA ELENA
ESPINO, and RAMIRO SALVADOR ESPINO,
JR, Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
May 26, 2009
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 287706
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 07-463524-NA
NICOLE RENEE WORLEY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
RAMIRO SALVADOR ESPINO,
Respondent.
Before: Jansen, P.J., and Hoekstra and Markey, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent mother appeals as of right the trial court’s order terminating her parental
rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), (h), and (n)(i). We affirm.
We review the trial court’s decision to terminate parental rights for clear error. MCR
3.977(J); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). The trial court clearly
erred in relying on §§ (h) and (n)(i) to terminate respondent mother’s parental rights because
they were not included in the petition and respondent mother did not receive adequate notice of
these sections. In re Perry, 193 Mich App 648, 651; 484 NW2d 768 (1992). However, the error
was harmless because §§ (c)(i) and (g) were established by clear and convincing evidence and
only one statutory section need be established for termination. MCL 712A.19b(3).
The conditions leading to adjudication were respondent mother’s substance abuse and
admitted inability to care for the children, her criminal conviction and failure to comply with
probation, the medical neglect of the children, and the inability of the children’s guardian to care
-1-
for them. Over a year later, respondent mother still had not completed a substance abuse
treatment program, was incarcerated for further failures to follow her probation, and had no
ability to care for the children. Respondent mother had been in several inpatient substance abuse
treatment programs during the pendency of the case and did not complete any. Further, when
she was not in a treatment program she did not remain in contact with the foster care worker.
Although respondent mother participated in NA and AA and claimed sobriety while in prison,
this was not strong evidence of her ability to remain sober upon her release. She had not been
employed or had housing for the children while this case was pending. Respondent mother
should be lauded for her efforts while in prison, but she did very little before she was in prison.
Although respondent mother argues that petitioner failed to make reasonable efforts toward
reunification, the testimony of the foster care worker established that respondent mother did not
stay in contact with petitioner when she was not in treatment.
Finally, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that petitioner established that
termination was in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5). Respondent mother had not
cared for the children in some time and, during the year before her incarceration, made no
progress toward being able to care for the children. The older children expressed a preference
for staying with their cousin with whom they were placed.
Affirmed.
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
/s/ Jane E. Markey
-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.
