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

C.D.M. v. K.60 So. 3d 409 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) · 1D10-2919

Court
1st DCA
Decided
2011-01-18
Case
TPR
Appellant
Mother

Reversed & remanded Termination order reversed and remanded because it lacked the section 39.810 manifest best interest findings and did not address least restrictive means.

Issues
Written findings & sufficiency of the order, Manifest best interests, Least restrictive means
Law cited
§ 39.810

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

On CourtListener
60 So.3d 409 (2011)

C.D.M., Mother of K.N.M., a minor child, Appellant,
v.
K. and N.R., Jr., Appellee.

No. 1D10-2919.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 18, 2011.

Crystal McBee Frusciante of the Crystal McBee Law Firm, P.A., Jupiter, and Susan Barber, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Region One, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Michael Massey of Massey & Duffy, LLC, Gainesville, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, C.D.M., appeals from an order terminating her parental rights. It appears that sufficient proof was presented to support a determination that the parental rights of Appellant should be terminated. However, we cannot conduct an appropriate appellate review because the *410 statutory factors enumerated in section 39.810, Florida Statutes, are not addressed in the written order and the trial court did not make any oral findings as to these factors at the hearing. The order on appeal is also silent as to whether termination of Appellant's parental rights was the least restrictive means of protecting the child from future harm. We therefore reverse the order terminating parental rights and remand for entry of an order containing the necessary findings of fact pursuant to section 39.810 and for reconsideration of any less restrictive alternatives before any final determination is reached with respect to termination. J.S. v. Fla. Dep't of Children & Families, 18 So.3d 1170, 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); T.O. v. L.S., 954 So.2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); S.S. v. D.L., 944 So.2d 553, 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, C.J., DAVIS and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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