Case Name: M.R. & J.R., Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2001-01-10
Citations: 783 So. 2d 277
Docket Number: Nos. 3D99-1268, 3D99-1880
Parties: M.R. & J.R., Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Appellee.
Judges: Before JORGENSON, COPE and LEVY, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 783
Pages: 277–284

Head Matter:
M.R. & J.R., Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Appellee.
Nos. 3D99-1268, 3D99-1880.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan. 10, 2001.
Rehearing Denied March 26, 2001.
Greer Davis Wallace, Miami, for appellant J.R.
Marc Anthony Douthit, Miami, Jason F. Joseph, for appellant M.R.
Robin H. Greene, Miami, for appellee.
Lauri Waldman Ross and Theresa L. Girten, Miami, for Guardian ad Litem Program.
Before JORGENSON, COPE and LEVY, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In separate appeals, the parents of two minor children appeal from an Order adjudicating the children dependent. We affirm, as the trial court's findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
The trial court conducted an adjudicatory hearing in which the following evidence was introduced: expert medical testimony and written medical reports; testimony from the Protective Investigator for the Department; expert testimony and reports from a licensed psychologist who examined the children and parents; and direct testimony from the parents and the children themselves. Based upon that evidence, the trial court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the children had been abused; that both the mother and father had failed to protect them; and that prospective abuse and neglect were likely to occur if the children remained with either or both parents. We affirm, finding that the trial court's findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence. See In Re M.F.G. v. Department of Children & Families, 723 So.2d 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (holding that where the department establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the child was abused and was likely to be neglected in the future, adjudication of dependency was proper); see also § 39.408, Fla.Stat. (1999).
In so holding, we decline the dissent's implied invitation to reweigh the evidence presented below since that is the province of the trial court. Instead, we simply note that there is more than substantial competent evidence to support the findings of the trial court.
Affirmed.
COPE, J., concurs.
JORGENSON, J., dissents.