IN RE YOUNG MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of EMANUEL JACOB YOUNG, ENOCH MAURICE KEANE YOUNG, TEIA ACLISE YOUNG, MICHAEL MANDELA YOUNG, YOSHAUM SHATIESE YOUNG, and SHANETTA LATRICE YOUNG, Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED September 25, 1998 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 206623 Wayne Juvenile Court LC No. 94-315020 MARNICE YOUNG, Respondent-Appellant, and GREGORY WILLIAMS, Respondent. Before: Holbrook, Jr., P.J., and Wahls and Cavanagh, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from an order terminating her parental rights pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), (h), (i), and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i), (g), (h), (i) and (j). We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). As to respondent-appellant, the trial court relied primarily on § 19b(3)(h): The parent is imprisoned for such a period that the child will be deprived of a normal home for a period exceeding 2 years, and the parent has not provided for the -1­ child's proper care and custody, and there is no reasonable expectation that the parent will be able to provide proper care and custody within a reasonable time considering the age of the child. In order to terminate parental rights, the court must find that at least one of the statutory grounds for termination has been met by clear and convincing evidence. In re McIntyre, 192 Mich App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991). Once a statutory ground for termination has been met by clear and convincing evidence, the court shall order termination of parental rights unless the parent provides some evidence from which the court could conclude that termination is clearly not in the best interests of the children. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997). The trial court’s decision regarding termination is reviewed in its entirety for clear error. In re Hall-Smith, supra at 472. Here, the court took judicial notice of a Judgment of Sentence showing that respondent­ appellant was sentenced on March 6, 1997, to a term of six to fifteen years’ imprisonment for a jury conviction of manslaughter. MCL 750.321; MSA 28.553. On the basis of this documentary evidence, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that at least one of the statutory grounds for termination was met by clear and convincing evidence. Further, respondent-appellant did not provide evidence from which the court could conclude that termination of parental rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. See MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5). Therefore, the trial court did not err in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights. See Hall-Smith, supra. Affirmed. /s/ Donald E. Holbrook, Jr. /s/ Myron H. Wahls /s/ Mark J. Cavanagh -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.