IN THE INTEREST OF A.R.S. AND S.S., CHILDREN. N.W., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Neglect cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, the mother, challenges the order terminating her parental rights to her children, A.R.S. and S.S., and permanently committing them to the custody of appel-lee, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), for foster care placement and planning.
In a termination of parental rights case, the court considers the grounds for termination and the manifest best interests of the child. Section 39.467(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990) lists the factors which must be considered by the court in determining the manifest best interest of the child. Here, the trial court made a specific finding as to each element enumerated in 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 trial court but appears simply to suggest that she should be given one more chance.
Affirmed.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and HALL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
N.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 843 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…ence,1 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. D.J.S., 563 So. 2d at 662; E.A.W., 658 So. 2d at 967; see also In re A.R.S., 617 So. 2d 1148, 1149 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)(“Competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s findings and decision that the evidence clearly showed neglect and abandonment....”). Subsection 39.806(1)0 To establish a prima facie case under section 39.806(l…
-
M.A. v. Dept. OF Children AND Families, 814 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…fare of the Children, although it has been five (5) years since the children were initially removed and taken into custody by the State. These findings and conclusions were supported by competent substantial evidence. See In the Interest of A.R.S., 617 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Thus, we affirm the order terminating the father’s parental rights. AFFIRMED. THOMPSON, C.J., and PETERSON, J., concur. . Section 39.806(l)(e) does not allow for TPR solely because a child is declared dependent; it also requir…
-
K.S. v. R.C., 766 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…ept. of Children and Families, 765 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); M.A.P. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 739 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). The court also found that termination was in the best interest of the child. In the Interest of A.R.S., 617 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). In this case, the child was permanently placed in the custody of her father, her step-mother was waiting in the wings to possibly adopt her, and K.S. had acted in ways to disrupt the child’s relationships with her biological fath…
Authorities Cited
- Rathman v. Warren, 602 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- In the Interest of D.F., 602 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)