G.K., THE FATHER, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, ET AL., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Domestic Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
Concession op Error
Appellant challenges the trial court’s order adjudicating dependency. Based on the concession of error by the Department of Children and Families,- we agree there was no • competent substantial evidence that the children witnessed any incidents of domestic violence involving the parents, or that the children suffered any physical or emotional harm as a result of these incidents, or that the father posed a current threat to the safety of the children. C.W. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 10 So.3d 136, 139 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). The trial court also relied upon inadmissible hearsay evidence to support the order of dependency, and these errors were not harmless. See Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So.3d 1251, 1256 (Fla.2014). Accordingly, we reverse and remand the case to the trial court to vacate the adjudication of dependency and for further proceedings. J.R. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 995 So.2d 611, 612 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).
Reversed and Remanded.
DAMOORGIAN, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blair Alexandria Edwards v. State, 257 So. 3d 586 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…itancy.” Even if the appellate court “may have decided this case differently had we been the trier of fact, ‘it is not the function of this court to reweigh the evidence and substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.’” J.B. v. C.S., 186 So. 3d 1142, 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (quoting In the Interest of R.D.D., 518 So. 2d 412, 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)). The record in this case includes competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determination that the State presented clear a…
-
C.F. v. Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)…esolving her appeal and which impels us to affirm. In an appeal of a final judgment terminating parental rights, it is not the function of this Court “‘to reweigh the evidence and substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.’” J.B. v. C.S., 186 So. 3d 1142, 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (quoting In the Interest of R.D.D., 518 So. 2d 412, 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)). Rather, where the trial court has weighed the evidence and reached a conclusion, its judgment enjoys a presumption of correctness and “will not be…
-
P.R. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 337 So. 3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)…996, 999 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Under this highly deferential standard, an order terminating a parent’s rights that is supported by sufficient evidence will be affirmed despite that parent’s improvements or desire for reunification. See J.B. v. C.S., 186 So. 3d 1142, 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). A As a threshold matter, the father failed to preserve his arguments on appeal. In each of them, he argues that the evidence could not support termination of his parental rights. But he failed to move for a dismissal bel…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 2014)
- C.W. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 10 So. 3d 136 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- J.R. v. State, 995 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)