IN THE INTEREST OF S. T. P., D. K. P.
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.
The appellate court affirmed a juvenile court's order adjudicating children as dependent, rejecting the appellant's arguments that the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction due to a prior divorce decree granting custody and that the evidence was insufficient.
Yes, the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court had jurisdiction. The evidence was sufficient to support the dependency adjudication.
“It is apparent that this position cannot be sustained in view of the holding in. In Interest of S.L.T., Fla.App.1965, 180 So. 2d 374, 376.”
This quote establishes the court's reasoning for rejecting the appellant's jurisdictional argument.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant challenged an order from the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court that declared minor children dependent. The appellant argued that the…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dependency Of Children cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant challenges an order of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Dade County, which adjudicated the designated minor children as being dependent children within the meaning of Fla. Stat. § 39.01(10), F. S. A.
On this appeal, it is first urged that the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court lacked jurisdiction because the appellant, had been granted custody of the children-by a divorce decree of the circuit court. It is apparent that this position cannot be sustained in view of the holding in. In Interest of S.L.T., Fla.App.1965, 180 So.2d 374, 376.
Appellant’s remaining points on appeal' are directed to the weight and sufficiency-of the evidence. A review of the record' convinces us that no reversible error has-been shown. See Noeling v. State, Fla.1956, 87 So.2d 593; In Re C.E.S., Fla.App.1958, 106 So.2d 610.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Suiero v. State, 248 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)…onnection between the appellant and the searched premises. The right to immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures can be asserted only by him whose rights are violated. 29 Fla.Jur., Search and Seizure, § 7. In Robinson v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So. 2d 29, the Second District Court, in commenting upon the question of the standing to attack the legality of a search, stated: “The last three points raised in this appeal concern the validity of the search warrant and the search and seizure which occurre…
-
Ferby v. State, 404 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…f the trial judge relating to the admissibility of certain evidence, see, e.g., Nelson v. State, 281 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Whitlow v. State, 256 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); and the sufficiency of the evidence. See, e.g., Robinson v. State, 194 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); Brooks v. State, 188 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 192 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 1966). The defendant claims he was inadequately and ineffectually represented by his trial counsel of record because his counsel: did not call h…
-
Joseph v. State, 447 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…(Fla. 2d DCA 1971); Kish v. State, 253 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Sellers v. State, 249 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Garner v. State, 218 So. 2d 460, 463 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Paulk v. State, 211 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968); Robinson v. State, 194 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); Brown v. State, 187 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 192 So. 2d 485 (Fla.1966); Ziegler v. State, 180 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Coyner v. State, 177 So. 2d 715, 717 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Chayter v. State, 176 So. 2d 382…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In the Interest of S. L. T., 180 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- Noeling v. State, 87 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 1956)
- State v. Brock, 106 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)