L.E., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, APPELLEE
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.
A Florida appellate court affirmed the termination of a father's parental rights to three minor children after he was convicted of capital sexual battery and lewd assault against the children's sibling and sentenced to three consecutive life sentences without parole. The court held that termination was proper under Florida's statutory framework for incarcerated sexual predators.
The court affirmed the termination of parental rights, holding that section 39.806(l)(d) properly applied because the father's sentence was entered after the statute's October 1, 1997 effective date, his three consecutive life sentences constitute a substantial portion of the children's minority, and his classification as a sexual predator and convictions for capital sexual battery provide independent bases for termination. Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the statute's application.
[1] A parent's parental rights may be terminated when the parent is incarcerated and the period of expected incarceration constitutes a substantial portion of the child's min…
[2] A parent's parental rights may be terminated when the parent is incarcerated and has been determined to be a sexual predator or convicted of a capital, life, or first-deg…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The lower court found by clear and convincing evidence that the father was convicted of three counts of capital sexual battery and one count of lewd assault against V.L., the half-sibling of his minor children, and that it was in the manifest best interests of the children that his parental rights be terminated.”
Establishes the factual and legal basis for termination reviewed on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe father was convicted of three counts of capital sexual battery and one count of lewd assault against V.L., the half-sibling of his three minor chi…
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 Manifest Best Interests Of The Child cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
L.E. (the father) appeals from a final judgment terminating his parental rights to three minor children, M.E., L.A.E. and L.E.E. The lower court found by clear and convincing evidence that the father was convicted of three counts of capital sexual battery and one count of lewd assault against V.L., the half-sibling of his minor children, and that it was in the manifest best interests of the children that his parental rights be terminated. We affirm.
On January 28, 1998, the father was sentenced to three consecutive life sentences without parole as a sexual predator. Thereafter, the lower court terminated his parental rights upon application of section 39.806(l)(d), Florida Statutes (Supp.1998).1 This section provides, in pertinent part, that there are grounds for termination of parental rights:
(d) When the parent of a child is incarcerated in a state or federal correctional institution and either:
1. The period of time for which the parent is expected to be incarcerated will constitute a substantial portion of the period of time before the child will attain the age of 18 years;
2. The incarcerated parent has been determined by the court to be ... a sexual predator as defined in s. 775.21; has been convicted of ... a sexual battery that constitutes a capital, life, or first degree felony violation of s. 794.011; ... or
3. The court determines by clear and convincing evidence that continuing the parental relationship with the incarcerated parent would be harmful to the child and, for this reason, that termination of the parental rights of the incarcerated parent is in the best interest of the child.
§ 39.806(l)(d), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998). The father’s three consecutive life sentences without parole will plainly outlast the children’s minority. Moreover, his classification as a sexual predator and convictions for capital sexual battery of the children’s sibling provide independent bases for termination of parental rights under the applicable law. Accordingly, the lower court did not err in finding that it is in the manifest best interests of the children that the court terminate the father’s parental rights.
The father maintains that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to contend that section 39.806(l)(d) could not be applied to his case, where he was in custody since March of 1997, before the effective date of material amendments to this section. Chapter 97-226, section 6, Laws of Florida, which amended section 39.464 provides, “[tjhis act shall [take] effect October 1, 1997, and applies to any person incarcerated after October 1, 1997, who is sentenced to a term of incarceration which would qualify under the provisions of this act, as well as to any persons loho are sentenced after that date.” (Emphasis added). While the father was in custody pending trial prior to October 1, 1997, the record reflects that his sentence was entered in January 1998, after the effective date of the amendment to section 39.806(l)(d). Accordingly, counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the application of this section.
Affirmed.
. Formerly section 39.464(l)(d), Florida Statutes (1997).