IN RE FARMER/WALKER MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of ANTHONY DEJUAN FARMER
and TANTANIEA TYLANA WALKER, Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, f/k/a
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 14, 2006
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 268662
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 96-347750-NA
PATRICE DAWNELLE WALKER,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
VOLEE BROWN, a/k/a VOLLEE BROWN,
Respondent.
Before: Fort Hood, P.J., and Murray and Donofrio, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A19.b(3)(c)(i) and(g). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that reasonable efforts were made by the
agency to aid in the unification of the family. MCL 712A.18f(4); MCR 3.977(J); In re Sours,
459 Mich 624, 633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). Respondent did not take advantage of the services
offered to her and admitted that she continued with substance abuse throughout the pendency of
the case. Petitioner made reasonable efforts for respondent to receive a psychiatric examination
and medication, and it was not the responsibility of the caseworker to provide a picture ID for
respondent.
The evidence did not show that termination of respondent’s parental rights was clearly
not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341; 354-355; 612
NW2d 407 (2000). The only evidence offered by respondent regarding this issue was that she
was appropriate during visits, and there was bonding between her and the children. However,
her problems of poor parenting, lack of income and employment, and substance abuse date back
-1-
to at least 1996. None of the conditions that brought the children into care in November 2004
had been rectified by the time of the trial 14 months later. The children needed permanency, and
the trial court did not err in finding that termination of respondent’s parental rights would be in
the children’s best interests.
Respondent was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. People v Sabin (On
Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659; 620 NW2d 19 (2000); In re Simon, 171 Mich
App 443, 447; 431 NW2d 71 (1988). The record does not reveal mistakes by counsel that
demonstrate a performance below an objective standard of reasonableness under prevailing
norms or that there was a reasonable probability that, had counsel moved to reopen the proofs for
respondent’s testimony, the result of the proceeding would have been different as respondent
now claims. People v Ginther, 390 Mich 436, 443; 212 NW2d 922 (1973); People v Effinger,
212 Mich App 67, 69; 536 NW2d 809 (1995).
Affirmed.
/s/ Karen M. Fort Hood
/s/ Christopher M. Murray
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
-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.
