R.P., FATHER OF S.P., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
R.P., FATHER OF S.P., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
49 So. 3d 339
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2010)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
We affirm the lower court’s order that terminated the parental rights of Appellant, rejecting the contentions that the evidence was insufficient to support termination and that termination was not the least restrictive means of protecting the child. We have specifically addressed the merits of the insufficiency argument, notwithstanding Appellee’s protestation that this argument was not preserved. In doing so, we align ourselves with the Fourth District’s decision in H.D. v. Department of Children & Families, 964 So.2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). We acknowledge apparent conflict with J.D. v. Department of Children & Families, 825 So.2d 447 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).
AFFIRMED.
PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
J.F.S. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 100 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…, that our holding requiring preservation of an evidentiary sufficiency issue under Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure [*785] 8.525(h) conflicts with decision of the Fourth and Fifth District Courts of Appeal in R.P. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 49 So. 3d 339 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) and H.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 964 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). We certify conflict with these decisions. AFFIRMED. CLARK, WETHERELL, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.…
-
O. T. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families, 116 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…d 447 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Because the Fourth and Fifth District Courts of Appeal disagree that a parent must preserve issues for appellate review via motion for judgment of dismissal, we certify conflict with R.P. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 49 So. 3d 339 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); and H.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 964 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), review dismissed, 985 So. 2d 1059 (Fla.2008). AFFIRMED. PADOVANO, MARSTILLER, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.…
-
B.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 134 So. 3d 972 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…ren & Families, 38 So. 3d 236 (Fla. [*973] 1st DCA 2010); K.J. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 38 So. 3d 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); J.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 825 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); but see R.P. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 49 So. 3d 339 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); H.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 964 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). BENTON, C.J., WETHERELL, and RAY, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- H.D. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families & Guardian Ad Litem Program, 964 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- J.D. v. The Dep't OF Child. & Families, 825 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Blice v. State, 825 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)