R.S. v. Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.S. v. Department of Children & Families

106 So. 3d 981, 2013 WL 557023, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2414

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 11, 2013

DocketNo. 5D12-4021

StatusPublished

This text of 106 So. 3d 981 (R.S. 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.S. v. Department of Children & Families, 106 So. 3d 981, 2013 WL 557023, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2414 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, R.S. [“R.S.”], appeals the order of adjudication, finding his child, A.R.S., dependent and entering a case plan with a goal of permanent guardianship. A.R.S. was sheltered after R.S. was arrested for multiple drug offenses, his third in two years. The mother is deceased. The Department of Children and Families [“DCF”] subsequently filed a dependency petition that alleged that R.S. engaged in chronic substance abuse and that he was currently incarcerated. R.S. denied the dependency allegations.

Without taking any evidence, the trial court entered an adjudication that DCF [982]*982had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the child was dependent. The court then set a disposition hearing, to which R.S. objected in the absence of an adjudicatory hearing. A case plan with a goal of permanent guardianship was nevertheless entered by the lower court.

The Guardian ad Litem and DCF both properly concede that the court erred in failing to hold an adjudicatory hearing. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for that purpose.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, R.S. [“R.S.”], appeals the order of adjudication, finding his child, A.R.S., dependent and entering a case plan with a goal of permanent guardianship. A.R.S. was sheltered after R.S. was arrested for multiple drug offenses, his third in two years. The mother is deceased. The Department of Children and Families [“DCF”] subsequently filed a dependency petition that alleged that R.S. engaged in chronic substance abuse and that he was currently incarcerated. R.S. denied the dependency allegations.

Without taking any evidence, the trial court entered an adjudication that DCF [982]*982had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the child was dependent. The court then set a disposition hearing, to which R.S. objected in the absence of an adjudicatory hearing. A case plan with a goal of permanent guardianship was nevertheless entered by the lower court.

The Guardian ad Litem and DCF both properly concede that the court erred in failing to hold an adjudicatory hearing. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for that purpose.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 So. 3d 981, 2013 WL 557023, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rs-v-department-of-children-families-fladistctapp-2013.