MICHAEL L. RATHMAN, SUPERINTENDENT, HENDRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, AND HARRY K. SINGLETARY, JR., SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, APPELLANTS,
v.
WILLIE JAMES WARREN, APPELLEE
MICHAEL L. RATHMAN, SUPERINTENDENT, HENDRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, AND HARRY K. SINGLETARY, JR., SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, APPELLANTS,
WILLIE JAMES WARREN, APPELLEE
602 So. 2d 970
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1992)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM
The operative facts of this appeal are indistinguishable from those in Singletary v. Powell, 602 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Accordingly, as in that appeal, we reverse the trial court’s order transferring venue, and remand for further proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ERVIN, MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In the Interest of D.F., 622 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…on of parental rights, “HRS need only to prove the manifest best interest of the children, the conditions of 39.464(4) having previously been fulfilled.” The father took an appeal of the trial court’s order. See In the Interest of D.F., K.W., T.W., 602 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Our prior opinion held that the dependency petition failed to place the father on notice that grounds for termination of parental rights would be at issue at the dependency hearing. Although “egregious abuse” constitutes grounds…
-
ASH v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 649 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…tation of witness testimony or sworn documentation. Ash is concerned that the finding by the trial court can be used to terminate her parental rights in a subsequent proceeding without HRS having to present testimony. See In re the Interest of D.F., 602 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). This issue is not addressed because the only viable order before the court did not comply with the rules of juvenile procedure and that non-compliance is dispositive of the appeal. There are no written findings in the 24 June…
-
In the Interest of A.R.S. & S.S. v. State, 617 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…e trial court made a specific finding as to each element enumerated in [*1149] the statute. In addition, the court found that the elements of section 39.467(3) had been proven by clear and convincing evidence. In the Interest of D.F., K.W. and T.W., 602 So. 2d 970 (Fla.1st DCA 1992). Competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s findings and decision that the evidence clearly showed neglect and abandonment of the children by appellant. Appellant does not seriously dispute the findings of the tria…
Authorities Cited
- Broida v. In re Est. OF Ann Horowitz, 602 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Singletary v. Powell, 602 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)