Court Opinion

ID: 9959554
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-12 05:05:45.743472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:08.209049
License: Public Domain

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to
                  revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.

                           STATE OF MICHIGAN

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                                                                       UNPUBLISHED
In re C. C. C. BONNER, Minor.                                          April 11, 2024

                                                                       No. 367849
                                                                       Wayne Circuit Court
                                                                       Family Division
                                                                       LC No. 2022-000205-NA

Before: RIORDAN, P.J., and O’BRIEN and MALDONADO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

        Respondent appeals as of right the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights to the
minor child, CCCB, under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii) (parent has deserted child for 91 days or more
and not sought custody); (c)(i) (conditions leading to adjudication continue to exist); (c)(ii) (other
conditions exist causing child to come within court’s jurisdiction); (g) (failure to provide proper
care and custody); and, (j) (reasonable likelihood the child will be harmed if returned to the parent).
On appeal, respondent does not challenge the statutory grounds for termination, and argues only
that termination of his parental rights was contrary to CCCB’s best interests. We affirm.

                                        I. BACKGROUND

        CCCB was born on December 21, 2021. On that date, Children’s Protective Services
(CPS) received information from the hospital that CCCB was born testing positive for
amphetamines, cocaine, morphine, and Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). On February 28, 2022, the
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) filed a petition against CCCB’s mother1 and
respondent requesting that the trial court take jurisdiction over CCCB, who had been placed with
her paternal aunt, Geneva Gates. Based on respondent’s admitted lack of housing and inability to
provide for CCCB, the trial court authorized the petition and took jurisdiction over CCCB.

       To attain reunification, the DHHS created a parent-agency agreement for respondent,
which required that he: attend all court hearings; attend weekly parenting times; maintain suitable

1
  CCCB’s mother’s parental rights were terminated on August 24, 2023, the same date as
respondent’s rights. However, she is not a party to this appeal.

                                                 -1-
housing; maintain contact with the DHHS; obtain a legal source of income; sign all necessary
releases of information; and attend parenting classes. Throughout the proceedings, respondent
failed to maintain contact with the DHHS. On numerous occasions, he did not answer phone calls,
and the DHHS could not locate him. Respondent did not attend all hearings and was removed
from parenting classes for failing to attend. When he did communicate with the DHHS, he noted
that his home was under construction but refused to provide an address. Further, respondent was
unable to support his assertion that he had stable employment; he alleged that he worked at a local
car wash but was paid under the table. Respondent sporadically exercised parenting time with
CCCB, and when he was present, he often fell asleep, appeared disengaged, and left early.

         Respondent was incarcerated in April 2023 for violating the conditions of his parole. His
last visit with CCCB was in December 2022. On May 10, 2023, the DHHS filed a supplemental
petition requesting that the trial court terminate respondent’s parental rights. The trial court found
statutory grounds for termination and determined that it was in CCCB’s best interests to terminate
respondent’s parental rights, despite the fact that CCCB was in a relative placement with Gates.
This appeal followed.

                                      II. BEST INTERESTS

        Respondent argues that the trial court erred when it found that termination of his parental
rights was in the best interests of CCCB because he was unable to complete his parent-agency
agreement due to his incarceration, and CCCB was in a relative-placement with Gates. We
disagree.

         This Court reviews “for clear error the trial court’s determination of best interests.” In re
Sanborn, 337 Mich App 252, 276; 976 NW2d 44 (2021). “A finding of fact is clearly erroneous
if the reviewing court has a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed, giving
due regard to the trial court’s special opportunity to observe the witnesses.” In re Jackisch/Stamm-
Jackisch, 340 Mich App 326, 333; 985 NW2d 912 (2022).

        “Once a statutory basis for termination has been shown by clear and convincing evidence,
the court must determine whether termination is in the child’s best interests.” In re LaFrance, 306
Mich App 713, 732-733; 858 NW2d 143 (2014), citing MCL 712A.19b(5). Whether termination
is in the child’s best interest must be established by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. at 733.
“The focus at the best-interest stage has always been on the child, not the parent.” In re Atchley,
341 Mich App 332, 346; 990 NW2d 685 (2022) (quotation marks and citation omitted). When
determining best interests,

       the court should consider a wide variety of factors that may include the child’s bond
       to the parent, the parent’s parenting ability, the child’s need for permanency,
       stability, and finality, and the advantages of a foster home over the parent’s home.
       The trial court may also consider a parent’s history of domestic violence, the
       parent’s compliance with his or her case service plan, the parent’s visitation history
       with the child, the children’s well-being while in care, and the possibility of
       adoption. [In re White, 303 Mich App 701, 713-714; 846 NW2d 61 (2014)
       (quotation marks and citation omitted).]

                                                 -2-
Additionally, the fact that a child is in the care of a relative at the time of the termination hearing
is “an explicit factor to consider in determining whether termination was in [a child’s] best
interests.” In re Olive/Metts Minors, 297 Mich App 35, 43; 823 NW2d 144 (2012) (quotation
marks and citation omitted). “Placement with a relative weighs against termination, but that fact
is not dispositive given that a trial court may terminate parental rights in lieu of placement with
relatives if it finds that termination is in the child’s best interests[.]” In re Atchley, 341 Mich App
332 at 347 (quotation marks and citation omitted).

        We conclude that the trial court did not clearly err when it found by a preponderance of the
evidence that termination of respondent’s parental rights was in the best interests of CCCB. The
trial court found that throughout the proceedings, respondent was given ample time and
opportunity to comply with his parent-agency agreement before being incarcerated, yet he failed
to do so. Respondent’s parent-agency agreement was given to him on May 9, 2022, he was arrested
on April 22, 2023 for his parole violation, and he was sent back to prison on May 3, 2023. Thus,
respondent had almost one full year to comply with his parent-agency agreement. Yet, the DHHS
provided testimony from respondent’s caseworker that respondent failed to maintain contact with
the DHHS, did not attend all court hearings, never participated in parenting classes, and did not
demonstrate suitable housing or a stable source of income. Further, the caseworker testified that
respondent had not exercised parenting time with CCCB since December 2022 and prior to that,
his visits were sporadic. Given the amount of time respondent had before being incarcerated to
comply with his parent-agency agreement, there is no evidence to support his contention that he
would be compliant if given more time following his release from prison. This is compounded by
the fact that respondent could only guess when he would be released. The trial court found that
even if respondent was released from jail in 90 days, he still lacked suitable housing and a stable
income.

        The trial court further found that termination was in CCCB’s best interests despite her
placement with a relative due to her need for stability and permanency. CCCB was in Gates’s care
since birth, was thriving, and was bonded with Gates. In addition, the caseworker testified that
Gates reported to the DHHS that respondent did not engage with CCCB when he visited her and
that he often fell asleep or left after a short amount of time. The caseworker also testified that
Gates reported that respondent did not appear to have a bond with CCCB. Further, Gates was
interested in adopting CCCB and she was not interested in a guardianship. Although a child’s
placement with a relative weighs against termination of parental rights, the trial court found that
Gates provided CCCB with the permanency and stability that she needed and that respondent could
not provide. Respondent claimed to have phone calls with CCCB while incarcerated, but the trial
court did not find the calls to be enough to maintain contact with CCCB. Instead, the trial court
determined that CCCB did not know her father and was not bonded with him. Based on our review
of the record, this Court is not definitely and firmly convinced that the trial court erred in these
findings. Termination of respondent’s parental rights would allow Gates to move forward with
adoption.

                                                 -3-
        Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not clearly err by finding that termination
of respondent’s parental rights was in the child’s best interests.

       Affirmed.

                                                              /s/ Michael J. Riordan
                                                              /s/ Colleen A. O’Brien
                                                              /s/ Allie Greenleaf Maldonado

                                                -4-