L.C., FATHER OF J.C.C.O., A CHILD
v.
E.O., MOTHER OF J.C.C.O., A CHILD
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's termination of parental rights in a case involving a child conceived as a result of unlawful sexual battery. The court applied the highly deferential standard of review applicable to TPR cases, finding the trial court's findings supported by competent substantial evidence.
The trial court's termination of parental rights was affirmed. Where a child has been conceived as a result of unlawful sexual battery, there is a statutory presumption that termination of parental rights is in the child's best interest, and the trial court's findings supported by competent substantial evidence will not be set aside on appeal under the highly deferential standard of review.
[1] In termination of parental rights cases, the standard of review is highly deferential.
[2] Appellate courts will not set aside a trial court's findings of clear and convincing evidence if those findings are supported by competent substantial evidence.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“in termination of parental rights (TPR) cases, the standard of review is highly deferential”
Establishes the deferential standard applicable to TPR appeals
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA child (J.C.C.O.) was conceived as a result of unlawful sexual battery. The father (L.C.) appealed the trial court's termination of his parental righ…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Termination Of Parental Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See C.D. v. Fla. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 164 So. 3d 40, 42 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that “[i]n termination of parental rights (TPR) cases, the standard of review is highly deferential” and that “[w]here the trial court’s findings that the evidence is clear and convincing are supported by competent substantial evidence, and the appellate court cannot say that no one could reasonably find such evidence to be clear and convincing, the finding will not be set aside on appellate review” (citation omitted)), disapproved on other grounds by S.M. v. Fla. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 202 So. 3d 769, 772–73 (Fla. 2016); V.S. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 322 So. 3d 1153, 1160 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“It was the trial court’s role to decide the credibility of the mother’s testimony and the reliability of the [witness’s] opinion.” (citing Durousseau v. State, 55 So. 3d 543, 560 (Fla. 2010))); Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So. 2d 495, 508 (Fla. 2005) (“It is not this Court’s function to retry a case or reweigh conflicting evidence submitted to the trier of fact.” (citing Morrison v. State, 818 So. 2d 432, 451 (Fla. 2002))), abrogated in part on other grounds by Alahad v. State, 362 So. 3d 190, 198 (Fla. 2023); In Int. of X.W., 255 So. 3d 882, 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018) (recognizing that “a case plan with a goal of reunification is not required where, under section 39.806(1)(m)[, Florida Statutes], a child has been conceived as the result of an unlawful sexual battery” (citing D.A.D. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fam. Servs., 903 So. 2d 1034, 1040 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005))); § 39.806(1)(m), Fla. Stat. (2022) (“It is presumed that termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the child if the child was conceived as a result of the unlawful sexual battery.”).
WALLIS, LAMBERT, and SOUD, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2005)
- Morrison v. State, 818 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 2002)
- Durousseau v. State, 55 So. 3d 543 (Fla. 2010)
- S.M. v. Fla. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016)
- K.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 332 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)
- King v. State, 903 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- Zavion Alahad v. State, 362 So. 3d 190 (Fla. 2023)