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

A.M. v. Department of Children & Family Services8 So. 3d 1289 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) · 2D08-6133-2

Court
2nd DCA
Decided
2009-05-29
Case
Dependency
Appellant
Father

Reversed Dependency adjudication reversed on DCF's concession because the only evidence against the father was inadmissible hearsay.

Issues
Dependency adjudication: sufficiency of evidence, Evidence: hearsay

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

On CourtListener
DAVIS, Judge.

A.M., the Father, challenges the trial court’s order adjudicating his four-month-old child, A.M., dependent. The Department correctly concedes error because the only evidence presented below to support an adjudication of dependency as to the Father was inadmissible hearsay. As such, the evidence presented below was insufficient, and we must reverse. See R.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 881 So.2d 1130, 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“[Rjeversal is required where the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain the findings of the trial court.”).

Reversed.

FULMER and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.

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