ALICIA HOWARD, THE MOTHER, PETITIONER,
v.
CHARLES R. HOWARD, THE FATHER, AND BEATRIZ LLORENTE, ESQUIRE, AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR THE MINOR CHILD, C.R.H., RESPONDENTS
ALICIA HOWARD, THE MOTHER, PETITIONER,
CHARLES R. HOWARD, THE FATHER, AND BEATRIZ LLORENTE, ESQUIRE, AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR THE MINOR CHILD, C.R.H., RESPONDENTS
4 So. 3d 703
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2009)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Topics
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dependency Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion of the Court
In the course of a post-final judgment custody dispute in the family division of the circuit court between the parents of a sixteen year old boy, the trial judge, without notice, appropriate pleadings, or lawful authority under Chapters 39 1 61, or otherwise, ordered the custody of the child transferred to non-relatives, friends of the family who were not parties to the action. While the trial judge acted with good intentions, we find this inexplicable order a clear departure from the most essential requirements of law and it is therefore quashed and held for naught.
This order shall take effect immediately. No motion for rehearing shall be entertained.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Drawdy v. State, 98 So. 3d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…2) (holding double jeopardy principles permitted only one lewd or lascivious act conviction per episode for virtually simultaneous touching of girl’s breasts and buttocks in first episode and her breasts and vagina in second episode); J.M. v. State, 4 So. 3d 703 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (holding two acts of lewd or lascivious conduct in one episode were one offense). But see Comas v. State, 45 So. 3d 49, 50-51 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review denied, 59 So. 3d 107 (Fla. Mar. 18, 2011) (table decision) (citing Meshell…
-
Manetta v. State, 81 So. 3d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…s multiple charges alleging separate, but closely related acts of sexual abuse under section 800.4(l)(a), Florida Statute, to the present prosecutions under section 800.4(5)(c). But cf. Brown v. State, 25 So. 3d 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); J.M. v. State, 4 So. 3d 703 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009); Cabanela v. State, 871 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004).…
-
A.R. v. State, 27 So. 3d 774 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…amended orders are nullities. See O.H. v. State, 948 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that an order granting relief on a motion to correct disposition error entered more than thirty days after the motion was filed is a nullity); J.M. v. State, 4 So. 3d 703, 704 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (“[R]ule 8.135(b)(1)(B) requires the trial court to ‘file an order ruling on the motion’ within 30 days, failing which ‘the motion shall be deemed denied.’ ”). Accordingly, we reverse the original disposition order and reman…