R.M.L. v. Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.M.L. v. Department of Children & Families

147 So. 3d 1108, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15370, 2014 WL 4851786

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 1, 2014

DocketNo. 5D14-2556

StatusPublished

This text of 147 So. 3d 1108 (R.M.L. 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

R.M.L. v. Department of Children & Families, 147 So. 3d 1108, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15370, 2014 WL 4851786 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

WALLIS, J.

R.M.L., mother of R.L. and V.L., appeals the trial court’s order entering an adjudication of dependency and finding the [1109]*1109children dependent. R.M.L. argues only that the written order does not reflect the trial court’s oral ruling, which withheld adjudication of dependency but found the children dependent. We agree. B.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 864 So.2d 486, 488-89 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (“Where there is a difference between the court’s oral pronouncement and its written order, the oral pronouncement controls.” (citing D.F., Jr. v. State, 650 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995))). The transcript clearly reflects the trial court’s ruling that it was withholding adjudication and finding the children dependent. Accordingly, we remand the matter with instructions to conform the written order to the trial court’s oral pronouncement.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

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

WALLIS, J.

R.M.L., mother of R.L. and V.L., appeals the trial court’s order entering an adjudication of dependency and finding the [1109]*1109children dependent. R.M.L. argues only that the written order does not reflect the trial court’s oral ruling, which withheld adjudication of dependency but found the children dependent. We agree. B.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 864 So.2d 486, 488-89 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (“Where there is a difference between the court’s oral pronouncement and its written order, the oral pronouncement controls.” (citing D.F., Jr. v. State, 650 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995))). The transcript clearly reflects the trial court’s ruling that it was withholding adjudication and finding the children dependent. Accordingly, we remand the matter with instructions to conform the written order to the trial court’s oral pronouncement.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 So. 3d 1108, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15370, 2014 WL 4851786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rml-v-department-of-children-families-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack