AUSTIN DAVID CROCKER, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• J.P. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families, 183 So. 3d 1198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
  …rehabilitate the mother would be futile” is also based on record evidence. The trial court therefore had grounds under section 39.806(l)(c), Florida Statutes, to terminate the mother’s parental rights. See L.J. v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families, 33 So. 3d 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); M.H., 866 So. 2d at 222-23. On appeal, the mother essentially asks us to reweigh the evidence heard by the trial court. That is not our appropriate role. N.L., 843 So. 2d at 999-1000. Second Requirement — Manifest Best Interest…
• J.B. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 107 So. 3d 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
  …parents regardless of the provision of services, 2) there is no reasonable basis to believe the parents will improve; and 3) termination is the least restrictive means of protecting the child from harm. See L.J. v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families, 33 So. 3d 99, 101 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); M.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 866 So. 2d 220, 222-23 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). The Department sought termination of Appellants’ rights under this section based on conduct toward “other children,” as V.B. was immediately…

Authorities Cited

• Tilakia Beamon v. State, 23 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)