DEONTA HOWELL v. AMY U. HICKMAN

275 So. 3d 667

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: June 19, 2019
• Docket: 19-0520
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DEONTA HOWELL, Appellant,

v.

AMY U. HICKMAN, Appellee.

No. 4D19-520

[June 19, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Jessica Ticktin, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502018DR005241XXXXSB.

Deonta Howell, Jonesboro, GA, pro se.

Amy U. Hickman of Hausmann & Hickman, P.A., Boynton Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See A.A.F. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fam., 211 So. 3d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (affirming denial of putative father’s motion to intervene and motion for relief from final judgment of termination of parental rights because putative father was not entitled to notice of proceedings where putative father did not timely register with the Florida Putative Fathers Registry); § 63.063(2), Fla. Stat. (2018) (“A fraudulent representation is not a defense to compliance with the requirements of this chapter and is not a basis for dismissing a petition for termination of parental rights or a petition for adoption, for vacating an adoption decree, or for granting custody to the offended party. Custody and adoption determinations must be based on the best interests of the child in accordance with s. 61.13.”); § 63.063(3), Fla. Stat. (2018) (“In balancing the rights and interests of the state and of all parties affected by fraud, including the child, the adoptive parents, and the unmarried biological father, the Legislature has determined that the unmarried biological father is in the best position to prevent or ameliorate the effects of fraud and, therefore, has the burden of preventing fraud.”). GERBER, C.J., WARNER and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.