IN RE WOOLFOLK MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of J.B.W. and B.W.W., Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED December 17, 2002 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 241905 Macomb Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 00-048828-NA JAMISON WOOLFOLK, Respondent-Appellant, and BRANDY STRICKLAND, Respondent. Before: Owens, P.J., and Murphy and Cavanagh, JJ. PER CURIAM. Respondent appeals as of right the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights to his children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i), (c)(i), (g), and (j).1 We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). We review a trial court’s decision to terminate parental rights for clear error. MCR 5.974(I); In re Sours, 459 Mich 624, 633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). If the trial court determines that the petitioner has proven by clear and convincing evidence the existence of one or more statutory grounds for termination, the court must terminate parental rights unless it finds from evidence on the whole record that termination is clearly not in the child’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 353-354; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). We review the trial court’s decision regarding the child’s best interests for clear error. Id., 356-357. 1 The trial court’s order also terminated the parental rights of respondent Brandy Strickland, the children’s mother. Strickland appealed the order (Docket No. 241944). In an order entered on August 21, 2002, this Court dismissed the appeal pursuant to stipulation. -1- We hold the trial court did not clearly err in finding that petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence the existence of one or more statutory grounds for the termination of respondent’s parental rights. Initially, petitioner removed J.B.W. from respondent’s care because respondent admitted that he struck the child. B.W.W. was removed from respondent’s custody immediately after birth due to the incident with J.B.W. Respondent made only a minimal effort to comply with the parent-agency agreements. He failed to complete domestic violence and anger management classes, and thus failed to address the principal problem that contributed to the children being removed from his custody. Respondent was discharged without improvement from the term of probation to which he was sentenced as a result of the incident with J.B.W.2 Furthermore, the evidence showed that respondent failed to maintain suitable housing for the children and failed to provide documentation of employment. The trial court did not clearly err in finding that termination of respondent’s parental rights was warranted on the grounds that respondent physically abused J.B.W., MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i), that the conditions that led to adjudication continued to exist and were not likely to be rectified within a reasonable time, MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), that respondent failed to provide proper care or custody for the children and could not be expected to do so within a reasonable time, MCL 712A.19b(3)(g), and that there was a reasonable likelihood that the children would be harmed if returned to respondent’s custody, MCL 712A.19b(3)(j). The evidence did not show that termination of respondent’s parental rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. See MCL 712A.19b(5); Trejo, supra. Affirmed. /s/ Donald S. Owens /s/ William B. Murphy /s/ Mark J. Cavanagh 2 Respondent was convicted of fourth-degree child abuse, MCL 750.136b(6), as a result of that incident. -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.