Opinion ID: 1857014
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: evidentiary standard to establish dependency

Text: Finally, we find that an affirmative answer to the second certified question is dictated by our affirmative answer to the first question permitting admission and consideration of the child's out-of-court statements. [12] When combined with the objective and unchallenged corroborating medical evidence that was presented in this case, that some form of sexual penetration had occurred, we find the evidence sufficient to meet the preponderance of the evidence standard. We note that the majority opinion below also acknowledged that the medical evidence of D.W.'s sexual abuse could conceivably be viewed as corroborating [her] report of abuse. M.B., 21 Fla. L. Weekly at D1818, 1996 WL 453438. Again, we must remember that the alleged abuser's culpability is not the focus of a civil dependency proceeding. [13] Dependency proceedings are to be initiated for the protection of the child and not the punishment of the person creating the condition of dependency. § 39.404(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). Accordingly, we answer the second certified question in the affirmative. In summary, we answer both certified questions in the affirmative, quash the decision under review, and remand the case to the First District with directions for further proceedings consistent with this opinion, including the resolution of any issues not previously decided. It is so ordered. KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING and WELLS, JJ., concur.