The New Nation and University of Islam are under the leadership of Mr. Members of the New Nation of Islam practice the "Black Muslim" religion. The University of Islam is comprised of members of the New Nation of Islam. Debra testified that she had been unhappy in the lifestyle at the University from the moment she arrived there. Debra indicated to at least one person at the University that she had tried Islam and moved to the University with Robert in an effort to save her marriage. Robert and Debra had been experiencing marital difficulties before moving to the University. She and the children were transported by Debra's mother, who had come down from Flint, Michigan, to take them back after Debra had communicated to her by phone that Debra was extremely unhappy with life at the University. While Robert was asleep during the late night hours of that date, Debra took the two children and went back to Flint, Michigan. Robert and Debra lived together with their two children at the University of Islam until October 13, 1989. A substantial portion of the proceeds was given to the New Nation of Islam.Ī second child, Raheem, was born to Robert and Debra Muhammad on August 4, 1988. Robert sold the couple's house to Debra's father and sold and disposed of some personal property, including a car. With the agreement of Debra, Robert remained in Flint for a few more months before permanently relocating to the University himself in October of 1987. In July 1987, Debra Muhammad and the couple's two month old child, Radeyah, relocated to the University. The first time, they stayed at Marvin Muhammad's house, and the second time, they stayed in a hotel in Natchez. Robert and Debra visited the University of Islam twice in early 1987. Marvin Muhammad, through teaching sessions that Mr. The couple had become acquainted with the spiritual leader of the community, Mr.
They resided in Flint until 1987, when they relocated to an Islamic community in French Lick, Jefferson County, Mississippi, known as the University of Islam. Muhammad and Debra Muhammad, formerly Robert and Debra Wilson, were married on September 17, 1983, in Flint, Michigan. Muhammad filed notice of appeal to this Court two days later. The motion was formally denied on May 4, 1992, and Mr. Muhammad subsequently filed a motion for new trial, which was heard on February 11, 1992. Muhammad was granted reasonable visitation rights and ordered to pay child support in the amount of $200.00 per month. Muhammad custody of the children and a divorce on the ground of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. On December 5, 1991, the Jefferson County Chancery Court rendered a decision granting Mrs. Muhammad, through new counsel, contested the issue anew. Nevertheless, at the October hearing, Mr. Muhammad, through counsel, stated that he had no objection. Muhammad a divorce because she was the only *1241 one who put on evidence in that regard. At the conclusion of the April hearing, the court announced that it would grant Mrs.
Hearings were held in this matter on April 2, 1991, and October 30, 1991, because of a discovery issue regarding assets and income that remained unresolved at the time of the first hearing. Muhammad had deserted him when she departed with the couple's children on October 13, 1989. Muhammad subsequently filed his own cross-complaint for divorce. Muhammad's complaint by contesting his efforts to get custody, and by filing a cross-complaint for divorce on the ground of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. Prior to October 1989, Radeyah had resided in Mississippi continuously since she was two months old, and Raheem had lived his entire life in Mississippi. Muhammad filed his complaint, Radeyah was two years old and Raheem was one. Muhammad had removed the children from the couple's marital domicile in French Lick, Mississippi, to Flint, Michigan, on October 13, 1989. Muhammad initiated proceedings in the Jefferson County Chancery Court by filing a complaint against his wife Debra Muhammad for custody of the couple's two children, Radeyah P. We are asked also to find manifest error as to the grant of divorce.
We are asked to determine whether the trial judge's assessment of the issue of custody was impermissibly tainted by his view of the validity of appellant's religious beliefs. This case presents the always sensitive and problematic issue of child custody between competing parents in a setting colored by the equally sensitive subject of religious beliefs and values. Middleton, Fayette, for appellant.īefore HAWKINS, C.J., and PITTMAN and BANKS, JJ.