IN RE ISAIAH PHILIP TRIBBLE MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of I.P.T., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
December 17, 2002
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 238602
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 93-311450
MARLITTA RACHELLE TRIBBLE,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
PHILIP B. THOMAS,
Respondent.
Before: Owens, P.J., and Murphy and Cavanagh, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent Marlitta Tribble appeals as of right the order terminating her parental rights
to the minor child. We affirm. Respondent father has not appealed.
Respondent came to the attention of the court when the child tested positive for cocaine
at birth. Respondent received no prenatal care during her pregnancy. Evidence was presented
that respondent’s parental rights to five other siblings were terminated under similar
circumstances, and that respondent failed to cooperate with Family Independence Agency
workers. Her parental rights were terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i) and (ii), (g), (i), and
(l).
Under MCL 712A.19b(3), the petitioner for the termination of parental rights bears the
burden of proving at least one ground for termination. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 350;
617 NW2d 407 (2000). Once the petitioner has presented clear and convincing evidence that
persuades the court that a ground for termination is established, termination of parental rights is
mandatory unless the court finds that termination is clearly not in the child’s best interests. Id.,
355-356. Decisions terminating parental rights are reviewed for clear error. Id., 356.
-1-
There is clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of respondent’s
parental rights. Respondent caused the child physical injury by using cocaine during her
pregnancy, and causing him to suffer withdrawal symptoms after birth. She had the opportunity
to prevent the physical injury. Respondent made no effort to provide proper care and custody for
the child. Her parental rights to five other siblings were terminated for the same type of conduct
evident in this case. There was no evidence that termination would not be in the best interests of
the child.
Affirmed.
/s/ Donald S. Owens
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
-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.
