C.L., In Interest of, 93-2967
| Citation | 654 So.2d 1039 |
| Decision Date | 17 May 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-2967,93-2967 |
| Parties | 20 Fla. L. Weekly D1183 In the Interest of C.L., a Minor. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Karen M. Zann of Balocco and Zann, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants-Natural Parents.
Lorna M. Spivak, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee-C.L.
This is an appeal by the natural parents from a final order terminating their parental rights as to the minor child, C.L., alleging that the trial court erred in finding that there was clear and convincing evidence to terminate their parental rights and that it was in the child's best interests to do so. We find that the trial court's decision to terminate the natural parents' parental rights is amply supported by clear and convincing evidence and accordingly we affirm the decision of the trial court.
The trial court entered an extremely detailed fourteen page order setting forth its findings of fact, including its evaluation of the credibility and reliability of the witnesses. It concluded that grounds for termination had been established under both subsections 39.464(3) and 39.464(5), Florida Statutes (1991). The trial court, as trier of fact, was in a unique position in this case. It reached its decision after presiding over both the criminal case against the natural parents and the termination proceedings so that it listened to all the testimony without relying on depositions or transcripts.
In the criminal proceeding a jury found the natural parents guilty of criminal conduct involving the child; specifically, delivery of a controlled substance to a child, uttering a forged or fraudulent prescription and child neglect. The criminal convictions were affirmed on appeal. The evidence in the criminal trial formed the basis for part, but not all of the evidence in the termination case. The trial court heard detailed testimony directed to the additional allegations, apart from the testimony already presented at the criminal trial, including testimony and evidence concerning the circumstances surrounding the deaths of four of the natural parents' five previous children.
This court will not overturn the trial court's findings "unless it may be said as a matter of law that no one could reasonably find such evidence to be clear and convincing." In Re Adoption of Baby E.A.W., 647 So.2d 918, 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Kingsley v. Kingsley, 623 So.2d 780, 787 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), review denied, 634 So.2d 625 (Fla.1994); In Re: D.J.S., 563 So.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Aguila v. Frederic
-
Magbanua v. State
...on a question-by-question basis" rather than via blanket orders compelling or disallowing answers to any questions. See, e.g. , Magid , 654 So.2d at 1039. Absent unusual circumstances (not present here), this path is the one to be followed. After all, a trial judge will eventually have to c......
- Pisciotti v. Stephens
- O'NEAL v. Sun Bank, NA, 5D99-3488.