Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

PR v. Department of Children and Families, 4D05-4834 (2006)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 4D05-4834 Visitors: 5
Judges: Per Curiam
Filed: Aug. 23, 2006
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2017
Summary: 936 So. 2d 754 (2006) P.R., the Mother, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee. No. 4D05-4834. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. August 23, 2006. Roger Ally of the Law Offices of Roger Ally, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Tricia D. Brissett, Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Department of Children and Families. Patricia M. Propheter, Orlando, for appellee Guardian ad
More
936 So. 2d 754 (2006)

P.R., the Mother, Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

No. 4D05-4834.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

August 23, 2006.

Roger Ally of the Law Offices of Roger Ally, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Tricia D. Brissett, Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Department of Children and Families.

Patricia M. Propheter, Orlando, for appellee Guardian ad Litem Program.

PER CURIAM.

P.R., the mother, appeals the trial court's order terminating protective supervision and placing her child in the long-term custody of relatives. We agree that the trial court failed to comply with certain statutory requirements in making its determination. *755 The trial court may not order long-term custody unless DCF has submitted a case plan that "describe[s] the responsibilities of the relative" and "does not include reunification with the parents." See ยง 39.622(1)-(2), Fla. Stat. (2005). Further, pursuant to section 39.601(9)(f), when the trial court amends a case plan, "[a] copy of the amended plan must be immediately given" to the child's parents. Lastly, section 39.521(3)(d) requires that "[t]he order terminating supervision by the department shall set forth the powers of the custodian . . . ." None of these requirements were met in the instant case. We therefore reverse the order on appeal and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and Remanded.

STEVENSON, C.J., STONE, J., and BATEMAN, III, THOMAS HOWELL, Associate Judge, concur.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer