J.D., THE FATHER v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •        Third District Court of Appeal
    State of Florida
    Opinion filed February 9, 2022.
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    ________________
    No. 3D21-1986
    Lower Tribunal No. 19-15372
    ________________
    J.D., the Father,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    Department of Children and Families, et al.,
    Appellees.
    An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Denise
    Martinez-Scanziani, Judge.
    Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third
    Region and Kevin Coyle Colbert, Assistant Regional Counsel, for appellant.
    Karla Perkins, for appellee Department of Children & Families; Sara
    Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Laura J. Lee,
    Assistant Director of Appeals (Tallahassee), for appellee Guardian ad Litem.
    Before EMAS, HENDON and LOBREE, JJ.
    PER CURIAM.
    J.D., the father, appeals a final judgment terminating his parental rights
    to his child, H.D.    We affirm because the record contains substantial,
    competent evidence that the Department of Children and Families
    established by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for
    termination exist, specifically section 39.806(1)(e)(1), Florida Statutes
    (2021), failure to substantially comply with the case plan. See N.B. v. Fla.
    Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 
    183 So. 3d 1186
    , 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (“The
    standard of review for challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence
    supporting a termination of parental rights is whether the trial court’s order is
    supported by substantial competent evidence.” (quoting T.P. v. Dep’t of
    Child. & Fam. Servs., 
    935 So. 2d 621
    , 624 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)).
    “Establishment of but one of the statutory grounds for termination by clear
    and convincing evidence is enough to affirm a [termination of parental rights]
    order.” B.T. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 
    300 So. 3d 1273
    , 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA
    2020). Any argument that the final judgment was entered in the absence of
    due process is deemed abandoned, as the father did not raise the issue in
    his initial brief. See Ashear v. Sklarey, 
    247 So. 3d 574
    , 577 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA
    2018).
    Affirmed.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-1986

Filed Date: 2/9/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/9/2022