Dependency Law Finder

Florida's dependency statutes, court rules and DCF operating procedures, with the appellate opinions that apply them

data.robertlathamesq.org · All tools

Before you use this site

This site aggregates legal authorities from a variety of public sources. It is AI and human reviewed. Text processing errors can occur. Always check the information here against the official linked source.

This site is publicly available. Use for general research only. Do not submit confidential or identifiable case information.

I don't agree: show the official sources

D.M. v. Department of Children & Families849 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) · 1D02-5276

Court
1st DCA
Decided
2003-07-11
Case
Dependency
Appellant
Mother

Reversed & remanded Dependency adjudication reversed because the record did not support findings of neglect from leaving the children alone or from alleged substance abuse.

Issue
Dependency adjudication: sufficiency of evidence
Facts
Parent's substance abuse, Housing, poverty & inadequate supervision
Law cited
§ 39.01

Summary, issues, facts, outcome, and appellant were extracted automatically from the opinion. Check the opinion itself before relying on them.

On CourtListener
PER CURIAM.

Appellant argues that the trial court’s finding of acts constituting abandonment, abuse, and neglect, as defined in section 39.01, Florida Statutes (2002), was not supported by competent substantial evidence. We agree.

The record does not support the trial court’s finding that appellant neglected her children by (i) leaving them alone in the house, and (ii) because of her alleged substance abuse problems. See C.C. v. Department of Children and Family Services, 812 So.2d 520, 523 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)(ruling that the “trial court must determine whether substance abuse will affect a parent’s ability to provide the care and support the children need in the future”); B.C. v. Department of Children and Families, 846 So.2d 1273, 2003 WL 21348582 (Fla. 4th DCA June 11, 2003)(holding that the record failed to support a finding of prospective abuse or neglect due to the father’s alcohol or drug use).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

WEBSTER, PADOVANO and POLSTON, JJ. concur.

Opinion text: CourtListener, Free Law Project. Not an official reporter; check the court's version before citing.