J.R. v. Department of Children & Families

773 So. 2d 661, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 16835, 2000 WL 1867619
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 22, 2000
DocketNo. 5D00-1789
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 773 So. 2d 661 (J.R. v. Department of Children & Families) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
J.R. v. Department of Children & Families, 773 So. 2d 661, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 16835, 2000 WL 1867619 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Section 39.809(5), Florida Statutes (1999) requires a trial court to enter a written order with findings of fact and conclusions of law when terminating parental rights. In this case, the Department of Children and Families concedes that the order terminating J.R.’s parental rights as to T.R., her minor child, is deficient because it fails to make specific findings of fact. We must vacate the order and direct the trial court on remand to comply with section 39.809(5).

Additionally, the trial court’s oral pronouncements at the termination hearing do not conform to its written order. The written order indicates that termination resulted in part from failure to comply with a case plan pursuant to Florida Statutes, section 39.806(l)(e). However, oral pronouncement indicated that J.R.’s rights were being terminated pursuant to section 39.806(l)(c) and (i). These subsections provide that termination is proper [662]*662[wjhen the parent ... engages in conduct toward the child or toward other children that demonstrate that the continuing involvement of the parent ... in the parent-child relationship threatens the life, safety, well-being, or physical, mental or emotional health of the child irrespective of the provision of services” or if parental rights have been terminated as to a child’s sibling. It is clear from the record that termination was proper under section 39.806(l)(c) and (i). Therefore, we direct the trial court to remedy the inconsistency upon remand.

We find that J.R. s remaining arguments are without merit.

ORDER VACATED; REMANDED.

COBB, PETERSON and PALMER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

W.L., The Mother v. Department Of Children And Families
172 So. 3d 562 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
J.B.P. v. Department of Children & Families
868 So. 2d 1289 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
PJ v. Department of Children & Families
783 So. 2d 1148 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
773 So. 2d 661, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 16835, 2000 WL 1867619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jr-v-department-of-children-families-fladistctapp-2000.