IN THE INTEREST OF D.W., A CHILD. R.W., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 2012-07-06
No. 2D12-759
WHATLEY and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.
91 So. 3d 922 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2012)

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.


Holding

The court held that the Department of Children and Family Services conceded error regarding the dependency order against the father.


Facts & Procedural History

The Department initiated a dependency proceeding against the father, alleging failure to protect his child from the mother's substance abuse. The fath…

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.


Opinion of the Court
ALTENBERND, Judge.

ALTENBERND, Judge.

The father, R.W., appeals an order of dependency as to his minor child, D.W. The Department of Children and Family Services concedes error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

The Department sheltered D.W. in September 2011, when the child was approximately eight years old. The child’s mother was incarcerated at the time, and the Department maintained that R.W. had failed to protect the child from the mother’s known substance abuse problems. The Department initiated a dependency proceeding as to both parents. The mother did not contest the proceeding. R.W., however, contested the proceeding and received an adjudicatory hearing.

R.W. testified that he had not lived with the mother for at least two years but that he had recently gone to Colorado with the mother to look for a job while the child stayed with the paternal grandmother. The Department concedes that the record does not contain competent, substantial evidence to support the allegations against R.W. in the petition for dependency. The Department notes that the case is similar to our recent decision in S.T. v. Department of Children and Family Services, 87 So.3d 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).

Unlike the facts in S.T., the child is not in the custody of a parent but is currently in an approved placement with a paternal aunt. While conceding error in this appeal, the Department has explained that it intends to file a new petition based on new events that it believes will support an adjudication of dependency as to the father. Accordingly, this opinion does not mandate that the trial court give immediate custody of the child to R.W.

Reversed and remanded.

WHATLEY and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw