IN RE SMITH MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of TRAYSHAWN DEJUAN SMITH,
SHAWNNETTA MARCHELLE SMITH, and
SHAWNDEL JEREMIAH SMITH, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
December 18, 2003
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 245747
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 86-254872
TANGELYN RACHELLE SMITH,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
SHAWN WILLIAMS,
Respondent.
Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Neff and White, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals by delayed leave granted from the trial court order
terminating her parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and
(k)(i). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination
were proven by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I), now MCR 3.977(J); In re Trejo,
462 Mich 341, 353; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). The primary condition leading to adjudication was
respondent-appellant's failure to provide safe and suitable housing for the children. The evidence
established that respondent-appellant was unable to obtain and maintain suitable housing or
employment. She also did not timely follow through with significant aspects of her courtordered treatment plan in the areas of parenting skills and counseling. Previously, respondentappellant's rights to six of her nine children were terminated or released. The grounds for
termination regarding at least one of these children, Shawntasia Smith, included abandonment.
-1-
Further, the evidence did not establish that termination of respondent-appellant's parental
rights was clearly not in the best interests of the children. MCL 712A.19b(5); Trejo, supra at
356-357. Although the children were bonded with their mother, her continued failure to obtain
appropriate housing and a legal source of income caused the children uncertainty over their
future. Additionally, the evidence showed that respondent-appellant would not become ready
within a reasonable time considering the children's ages to provide proper care and custody. The
children need a permanent, safe, and stable home, which respondent-appellant cannot provide.
Thus, the trial court did not err in terminating respondent-appellant's parental rights.
Affirmed.
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
/s/ Janet T. Neff
/s/ Helene N. White
-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.
