Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS

In the Matter of ADRIAN GUY BINGHAM, JORDAN LEVI BINGHAM, SVNOYI ANISGVSDEE CEANDREA JOBE, and ISAYA DOHSA EDI BIGMEAT, Minors.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, v MELISSA LYNN JOBE, Respondent-Appellant.

UNPUBLISHED February 12, 2008

No. 277862 Genesee Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 04-118926-NA

In the Matter of ISAYA DOHSA EDI BIGMEAT, Minor.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, v JAMES BIGMEAT II, Respondent-Appellant. No. 277863 Genesee Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 04-118926-NA

In the Matter of ADRIAN GUY BINGHAM and JORDAN LEVI BINGHAM, Minors.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, v -1No. 278103

TRACY BINGHAM, Respondent-Appellant.

Genesee Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 04-118926-NA

Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Murphy and Borrello, JJ. PER CURIUM. In these consolidated appeals, respondents Melissa Jobe, James Bigmeat II, and Tracy Bingham appeal as of right from the trial court's order terminating their parental rights to the minor children. The court terminated the parental rights of Jobe, the mother of all four children, pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (c)(ii), (g), and (j). The parental rights of respondent Bigmeat, the father of Isaya, were terminated pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (g), and (j). Finally, the parental rights of respondent Bingham, the father of Adrian and Jordan, were terminated pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(ii), (g), and (j). We affirm.1 All three appellants argue that the trial court erred in finding that a statutory ground for termination was established by clear and convincing evidence. We disagree. A petitioner must prove a statutory ground for termination in MCL 712A.19b(3) by clear and convincing evidence. In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 350; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Only a single statutory ground need be established to terminate parental rights. In re McIntyre, 192 Mich App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991). One of the children, Isaya, is an Indian child. To terminate parental rights to an Indian child, in addition to proving a statutory ground for termination by clear and convincing evidence, a petitioner is required to present evidence, supported by the testimony of a qualified expert witness, that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that continued custody by the parent is likely to cause serious emotional or physical damage to the child. In re SD, 236 Mich App 240, 246; 599 NW2d 772 (1999); MCR 3.980(D); 25 USC 1912(f). This Court reviews the trial court's findings of fact under the clearly erroneous standard. MCR 3.977(J). A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Deference must be accorded to the trial court's assessment of the credibility of the witnesses before it. In re Newman, 189 Mich App 61, 65; 472 NW2d 38 (1991). Once a statutory ground for termination is established, the court must issue an order terminating parental rights unless there exists clear evidence, on the whole record, that termination is not in the child's best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, supra at 354. The court should decide the "best interests" question based on all of the evidence, without regard to

1

The court also terminated the parental rights of Svnoyi's father, Michael French, but he is not a party to this appeal.

-2-


which party produced the evidence. Id. at 352-354. The court's best interests decision is also reviewed for clear error. Id. at 356-357. I. Docket No. 277862 The trial court did not clearly err in finding that

Download IN RE BINGHAM MINORS.pdf

Michigan Law