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

J.D. v. Department of Children & Families3D21-1986

Court
3rd DCA
Decided
2022-02-09
Case
TPR
Appellant
Father
County
Miami-Dade

Affirmed Termination affirmed because competent evidence showed the father failed to substantially comply with the case plan; his due process argument was abandoned.

Issue
TPR ground: case plan noncompliance / continuing abuse

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

Court's PDF On CourtListener
       Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida
                       Opinion filed February 9, 2022.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
                            ________________
                             No. 3D21-1986
                       Lower Tribunal No. 19-15372
                          ________________

                            J.D., the Father,
                                  Appellant,
                                     vs.
           Department of Children and Families, et al.,
                                 Appellees.

      An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Denise Martinez-Scanziani, Judge.
     Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third Region and Kevin Coyle Colbert, Assistant Regional Counsel, for appellant.
      Karla Perkins, for appellee Department of Children & Families; Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Laura J. Lee, Assistant Director of Appeals (Tallahassee), for appellee Guardian ad Litem.

Before EMAS, HENDON and LOBREE, JJ.
     PER CURIAM.
      J.D., the father, appeals a final judgment terminating his parental rights to his child, H.D.    We affirm because the record contains substantial, competent evidence that the Department of Children and Families established by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for termination exist, specifically section 39.806(1)(e)(1), Florida Statutes (2021), failure to substantially comply with the case plan. See N.B. v. Fla. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 
183 So. 3d 1186, 1187
 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (“The standard of review for challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a termination of parental rights is whether the trial court’s order is supported by substantial competent evidence.” (quoting T.P. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fam. Servs., 
935 So. 2d 621, 624
 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)). “Establishment of but one of the statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence is enough to affirm a [termination of parental rights] order.” B.T. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 
300 So. 3d 1273
, 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020). Any argument that the final judgment was entered in the absence of due process is deemed abandoned, as the father did not raise the issue in his initial brief. See Ashear v. Sklarey, 
247 So. 3d 574
, 577 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).
      Affirmed. 

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