VINCENTE L. WOOTEN, APPELLANT,
v.
ZANDRA JACKSON, 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.
The court reversed an injunction for protection against domestic violence because the trial court denied the appellant his constitutional right to due process by failing to hold a full evidentiary hearing before entering the permanent injunction.
A trial court must hold a full evidentiary hearing and permit both parties to present evidence before entering a permanent injunction for protection against domestic violence.
[1] A trial court must hold a full evidentiary hearing permitting both parties to present evidence before entering a permanent injunction for protection against domestic viol…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“both section 741.30 and constitutional principles of due process require that the court hold a full evidentiary hearing before entering a permanent injunction against domestic violence”
The court cited Chanfrau v. Fernandez to establish the requirement for a full evidentiary hearing.
The trial court entered a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence against the appellant without providing him an adequat…
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 Domestic Violence Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence entered in this case pursuant to section 741.30, Florida Statutes (2001), because the trial court denied appellant his constitutional right to due process of law. On remand, the trial court shall permit the parties to present evidence on the issue of entitlement to the requested injunction. See, e.g., Chanfrau v. Fernandez, 782 So. 2d 521, 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (both section 741.30 and constitutional principles of due process require that the court hold a full evidentiary hearing before entering a permanent injunction against domestic violence); Utley v. Baez-Camacho, 743 So. 2d 613, 614 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (“The purpose of a due process hearing following the grant of an ex parte temporary injunction is to give the defendant an opportunity to show that the allegations previously relied on are not true”); Lewis v. Lewis, 689 So. 2d 1271, 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (the constitution, statute and rules contemplate, at a minimum, that the parties will have a reasonable opportunity to present evidence prior to a ruling on a request for a permanent injunction against domestic violence).
REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.
ALLEN, C.J., MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pope v. Pope, 901 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…forded a full opportunity to testify and to present witnesses. We reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to conduct a prompt, full eviden-tiary hearing in accordance with section 741.30, Florida Statutes (2004). See Wooten v. Jackson, 812 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Miller v. Miller, 691 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). In response to the allegations in the wife’s petition, the trial court issued a September 18, 2004, temporary injunction for protection against domestic violence. Due to the…
-
Dougan v. State, 836 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Williams v. State, 812 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). BOOTH, WEBSTER and LEWIS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Lewis v. Lewis, 689 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Utley v. Baez-Camacho, 743 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Chanfrau v. Fernandez, 782 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)