IN RE YOUNG/HUNTER /CHERRY MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of RYRAN ROMELO YOUNG,
TONY OLIVER HUNTER, JR., MARTEZ
LAKENTA HUNTER, and DANISHA CHERRY,
Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
November 14, 2006
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 268276
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-406063-NA
GENISA GENIA BEASLEY, a/k/a GENISA
JEANIE BEASLEY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
RYRAN LAMAR YOUNG and TONY OLIVER
HUNGER,
Respondents.
Before: Fort Hood, P.J., and Murray and Donofrio, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (g). 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 3.977(J); In re Sours, 459 Mich 624,
633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999); In re Gazella, 264 Mich App 668, 672; 692 NW2d 708 (2005); In
re McIntyre, 192 Mich App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1993). The conditions that led to
adjudication were respondent-appellant’s incarceration and her inability upon her release to
provide proper care and custody for the children. At trial, two and a half years later, respondentappellant was still unable to provide proper care and custody for the children. She was living in
her grandmother’s three-bedroom home, which would not have sufficiently housed the two
adults and four children. She had never demonstrated an ability to maintain stable housing or
-1-
income. She claimed that she had applied to become a state-paid caretaker for her grandmother.
However, that would bring in only between $300 and $400 a month, and there was no guarantee
that she would qualify for that job. Her grandmother was 73 years old, unable to care for herself,
and received only $479 a month. Even if respondent-appellant qualified as a caretaker for her
grandmother, there would not be sufficient income to support the needs of the children.
Furthermore, the evidence did not show that termination of her parental rights was
contrary to the best interests of the children. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 353;
612 NW2d 407 (2000). Respondent-appellant regularly attended visitation and parented
appropriately at visitation, and the worker testified that respondent-appellant and the children
were bonded. However, a review of the whole record reveals that respondent-appellant had not
been able to provide a suitable and adequate home or sufficient income to provide the proper
care and custody of the children. The evidence gave no indication that she would be able to do
so within a reasonable time. The children required stability and permanence in their lives.
Affirmed.
/s/ Karen M. Fort Hood
/s/ Christopher M. Murray
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
-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.
