IN RE RENARD LELAND HAMILTON MINOR

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of R.L.H., Minor. RUBY BROWN and LARRY BROWN, UNPUBLISHED October 25, 2002 Petitioners-Appellees, v No. 236528 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 99-383216 CHARLES TAYLOR, Respondent-Appellant. Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Wilder and Bandstra, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating his parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(f)(i) and (f)(ii). This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). We affirm. The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). The evidence in this case established that for more than two years respondent failed to comply with the support order and to have any contact or communication with the child. Further, we find without merit respondent’s claim that his incarceration prevented him from complying with the provisions of MCL 712A.19b(3)(f). See In re Caldwell, 228 Mich App 116; 576 NW2d 724 (1998). Further, the evidence did not show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental rights was clearly not in the child’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Thus, the trial court did not err in terminating respondent-appellant’s parental rights to the child. Affirmed. /s/ Joel P. Hoekstra /s/ Kurtis T. Wilder /s/ Brian K. Zahra -1-

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.