(dissenting).
I would vacate the orders terminating both parents’ parental rights and remand for a “least restrictive means” hearing and determination which were not undertaken
Affirmed.
D.S. v. Department of Children & Family Services882 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) · 3D03-2583
- Court
- 3rd DCA
- Decided
- 2004-09-22
Opinion text: CourtListener, Free Law Project. Not an official reporter; check the court's version before citing.
Not cited
No opinion in CourtListener's collection cites this case.
Cites 4 opinions in this collection
Citations to cases outside the collection are linked in the opinion text itself.
- E.E.A. v. Department of Children & Family Services 2D02-735 · 2nd DCA 2003Termination reversed because no evidence showed the relationship threatened the children and DCF never explored returning them to the grandmother, a less restrictive option.
- K.R. v. Department of Children & Family Services 2D02-1175-2 · 2nd DCA 2003Termination reversed: stale drug use did not prove egregious conduct or threat to the child, least restrictive means was unproven, and findings were vague.
- K.O. v. Department of Children & Families 5D02-1575 · 5th DCA 2003Termination order vacated and remanded because it lacked the required findings on the child's manifest best interests, though evidence supported the case plan ground.
- L.B. v. Department of Children & Families 1D02-2592 · 1st DCA 2002Termination reversed because the threat finding lacked clear evidence and termination was not least restrictive when the father's rights remained and supervised visits were safe.