M.Q.C., MOTHER OF L.S., C.S. AND M.P., CHILDREN, APPELLANTS,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review Of Factual Findings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
PLEUS, J., dissents with opinion.
PLEUS, J.,
dissenting.
I reluctantly dissent for the reason that the trial court did not comply with the clear mandate of section 39.811(5), Florida Statutes, which requires the trial court to state in writing the facts upon which termination was based. This requirement is important to the administration of justice because it is the only way an appellate court can determine error. In its brief, DCF acknowledges that the court’s order did not set out the facts but merely tracked the statutory factors listed in section 39.810, Florida Statutes.
In the case of L.T. v. Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative S6ervices, 464 So. 2d 201, 202 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), this court stated that “the trial court must make specific findings of fact supported by” the clear and convincing evidence. Similarly, in Moore v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 664 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), the trial court was reversed because the order terminating parental rights failed to specify what conduct the mother committed toward the children.
I would remand for an appropriate and written order setting forth the findings of fact to support the termination order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hernandez v. State, 946 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…ent cannot be deemed “trustworthy” under section 92.565 absent independent evidence establishing that a crime occurred or that the defendant’s admissions to criminal conduct are trustworthy. See Geiger, 907 So. 2d at 674-76.5 See also B.P. v. State, 815 So. 2d 728, 730 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (reversing conviction where the defendant’s confession was admitted under section 92.565 in the absence of any other evidence that the offense charged had been committed); Peterson v. State, 810 So. 2d 1095, 1098 (Fla. 5th D…
-
Elvis T. Frances v. State, 857 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…ver, at least in the context of custodial interrogation, is that if a juvenile indicates to police that he or she does not wish to speak to them until he or she has had an opportunity to speak with parents, the questioning must cease. B.P. v. State, 815 So. 2d 728 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). The defendant here did not make such a request. The voluntariness of the defendant’s confession is determined by an examination of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the confession. See Ramirez v. State, 739 So. 2d 5…
-
State v. S.V., 958 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…io, 773 So. 2d at 583-84). Nevertheless, “if the juvenile indicates to police that he or she does not wish to speak to them until he or she has had an opportunity to speak with parents, the questioning must cease.” Id. at 1004 (citing B.P. v. State, 815 So. 2d 728, 729 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)). This record is clear that the juvenile did not indicate prior to or during questioning that he wished to speak to his mother. Thus, the trial [*612] court’s reliance on this aspect alone to support its decision was flawed.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In the Interest of L.T. and C.T. v. State, 464 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Moore v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 664 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)