K.O., MOTHER OF T.L.O., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Termination Of Parental Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PALMER, J.
K.O. appeals the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights to her son, T.L.O. The evidence presented during the trial, if believed by the trial court, was sufficient to support the court’s decision to terminate K.O.’s parental rights based on section 39.806(l)(e) of the Florida Statutes (2001). However, K.O. argues, and the State properly concedes, that the trial court failed to set forth in its termination order-findings of fact relating to the best interest of the child as required by section 39.810 of the Florida Statutes (2001). Accordingly, we vacate the instant termination order and remand this matter to the trial court for issuance of an order that complies with the statute. See In re A.C., 751 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(holding that final judgment terminating mother’s parental rights did not satisfy the statutory requirement that the trial court consider and evaluate the manifest best interest of the children where neither the trial court’s final judgment nor the transcript of proceedings contained any finding of fact or conclusion of law as to the manifest best interest of the children).
VACATED and REMANDED.
PETERSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
T. P. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 860 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…C. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 812 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Failure to properly consider the manifest best interests of the child under section 39.810 constitutes reversible error. See K.O. v. Department of Children & Families, 843 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); K.M. v. Department of Children & Families, 795 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Hence, a termination proceeding is essentially a two-part process: 1) the trial court must find by clear and convincing evidence that one of the gro…
-
D.S. and J.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 882 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…rights and remand for a “least restrictive means” hearing and determination which were not undertaken [*523] below. See E.E.A. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 846 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); K.O. v. Department of Children & Families, 843 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); K.R. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 843 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); L.B. v. Department of Children & Families, 835 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).…
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of A.C. and A.M. v. State, 751 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)