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

W.G. v. Department of Children & Families3D22-1732

Court
3rd DCA
Decided
2023-04-19
Case
TPR
Appellant
Father
County
Miami-Dade

Affirmed Termination affirmed in a short opinion citing the highly deferential standard and the presumption of correctness for clear and convincing findings.

Issue
TPR: sufficiency of evidence, general

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 April 19, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
                            ________________
                             No. 3D22-1732
                       Lower Tribunal No. 21-15477
                          ________________

                            W.G., the Father,
                                  Appellant,
                                     vs.
           Department of Children and Families, et al.,
                                 Appellees.

     An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Angélica D. Zayas, Judge.
     Thomas Butler, P.A., and Thomas J. Butler, 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 HENDON, GORDO, and LOBREE, JJ.
     PER CURIAM.
      Affirmed. See Fla. Dep’t of Child. & Families v. A.R., 
253 So. 3d 1158, 1164
 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“Appellate review of a termination of parental rights case is ‘highly deferential. . . . a finding that evidence is clear and convincing enjoys a presumption of correctness and will not be overturned on appeal unless clearly erroneous or lacking in evidentiary support.’” (quoting C.G. v. Dep’t of Child. & Families, 
67 So. 3d 1141, 1143
 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011))); J.E. v. Dep’t of Child. & Families, 
126 So. 3d 424, 427
 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (“While a trial court’s decision to terminate parental rights must be based on clear and convincing evidence, our review is limited to whether competent substantial evidence supports the trial court’s judgment.” (quoting J.G. v. Dep’t of Child. & Families, 
22 So. 3d 774, 775
 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009))). 

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