M.S. v. Dept. of Children & Families
| Decision Date | 26 June 2000 |
| Citation | 765 So.2d 152 |
| Parties | (Fla.App. 1 Dist. 2000) M.S., NATURAL MOTHER OF D.W., APPELLANT, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE. NO. 1D99-3165. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Suwannee County. William R. Slaughter, II, Judge.
Christopher L. Craun, Lake City for Appellant.
H. Stephen Pennypacker, Contract Counsel, Pilot Project, Department of Children and Families, Gainesville, for Appellee.
Appellant, M.S., the natural mother of D.W., seeks review of a final judgment terminating her parental rights as to D.W. In the judgment, the trial court concluded that termination was appropriate under (1) section 39.806(1)(i), Florida Statutes (1999), because appellant's parental rights to a sibling had previously been involuntarily terminated, and (2) section 39.806(1)(e), based on appellant's failure to comply substantially with the case plan. Appellant challenges both bases for termination. We affirm as to the latter issue and, consequently, consider it unnecessary to address the former.
It is undisputed that parental rights may be terminated pursuant to section 39.806(1)(e) if a parent fails to comply substantially with a case plan for a period of 12 months after a child is adjudicated dependent. The record in this case, particularly the testimony of Karen Pickett, the counselor who worked with appellant, provided competent, substantial evidence to support the findings of noncompliance as to the essential tasks required by the case plan.
Although appellant argues that her failure to conform with the case plan was caused by lack of financial resources, lack of understanding of the case plan's terms, and the appellee's failure to provide her with required services, the record contains competent, substantial evidence which supports the trial court's contrary findings.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
B.T. v. Fla. Dep't of Children & Families, No. 1D19-2788
...DCF proved at least one statutory ground). DCF did not need to prove all of the grounds it alleged. Cf. M.S. v. Dep't of Children & Families , 765 So. 2d 152, 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (affirming TPR because competent, substantial evidence supported trial court's findings as to one statutory ......
-
KS ex rel. AS v. RC ex rel. AS
...excess of the twelve months specified, pursuant to section 39.806(1)(e), Florida Statutes (Supp.1998). See M.S. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 765 So.2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); M.A.P. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 739 So.2d 1287 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). The court also found that termi......
-
A. H. v. Fla. Dep't of Children & Family Servs.
...the record establishes that a parent did not comply with the essential tasks required by a case plan. See M.S. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 765 So.2d 152, 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Under section 39.806(1)(e), termination of parental rights is allowable:When a child has been adjudicated d......
-
JT v. Department of Children and Families, 1D00-4070.
...case plan, was an adequate basis to terminate her parental rights pursuant to section 39.806(1)(e). See M.S. v. Department of Children and Families, 765 So.2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Further, the order of termination reflects that the trial court expressly considered all of the factors out......