JESSE J. HILL, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• K.D. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 242 So. 3d 522 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
  …e abuse and involvement with the Department, allowed the Department to swiftly remove C.D. and seek termination due to the child’s substantial risk of potential harm from the mother’s continued involvement. See R.W. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 228 So. 3d 730, 733 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (recognizing “extraordinary circumstances” for termination without a case plan include termination based on continuing abuse through continued involvement under section 39.806(1)(c)). We find no merit to the mother’s argume…
• Guardian Ad Litem Program v. K.H. (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
  …to preserve and reunify families are not required if a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that any of the events described in [paragraph (1)(c)] have occurred.” § 39.806(2), Fla. Stat. (2018). See R.W. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 228 So. 3d 730, 733 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (“[T]he Legislature has specifically provided that no case plan is required where the trial court determines . . . that termination is proper pursuant to [section 39.806(1)(c)], Florida Statutes.”). Moreover, where the Depa…
• Q.A. v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
  …oral finding that Q.A. was competent to proceed after it reviewed the evaluations of the court-appointed experts. However, the trial court failed to memorialize its finding in a written order. See Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.095(3); see also Hill v. State, 228 So. 3d 730, 730 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017); B.R.C. v. State, 210 So. 3d 243, 245–46 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). We remand for entry of a nunc pro tunc order doing so. Second, the trial court failed to enter an order specifying the condition or conditions of probation that Q.…

Authorities Cited

• Francis v. State, 65 So. 3d 103 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)