IN RE MCCRARY MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of SUSAN DENISE MCCRARY and SHENELL DENISE MCCRARY, Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED October 3, 2000 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 218969 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 96-342502 PAMELA ANN MCCRARY, Respondent-Appellant, and STEVEN JAMES BEELBY, Respondent. Before: McDonald, P.J., and Sawyer and White, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the family court order terminating her parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g) and (j). We affirm. Although respondent-appellant contends that petitioner failed to present clear and convincing evidence to terminate her parental rights, she challenges the termination of her parental rights under § 19b(3)(a)(ii) only. Because only one statutory ground is necessary to terminate parental rights, In re McIntyre, 192 Mich App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991), and because respondent-appellant does not challenge the termination of her parental rights under the remaining three statutory grounds, i.e., §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (g) and (j), she is not entitled to appellate relief. In re JS and SM, 231 Mich App 92, 98; 585 NW2d 326 (1998), rev’d on other grounds In re Trejo Minors, ___ Mich ___; ___ NW2d -1­ ___ (Docket No. 112528, decided 7/5/2000); Roberts & Son Contracting, Inc v North Oakland Development Corp, 163 Mich App 109, 113; 413 NW2d 744 (1987). We reject respondent-appellant’s general argument that the trial court’s factual findings are clearly erroneous because they are not supported by competent evidence. Contrary to respondent­ appellant’s claim, the psychiatric reports relied on by the caseworker were identified and admitted into evidence. Additionally, the record indicates that the reports were provided to her counsel. Further, hearsay evidence, including written reports, may be considered at a hearing to terminate parental rights if relevant and material. MCR 5.974(F)(2), In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 339, n 6; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Finally, regarding respondent-appellant’s claim that the caseworker’s testimony was conflicting, that issue involves witness credibility, which is within the province of the trial court to resolve. MCR 2.613(C); Miller, supra at 337. This Court will not resolve the issue of witness credibility anew. Affirmed. /s/ Gary R. McDonald /s/ David H. Sawyer /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.