Court Opinion

ID: 9902555
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-27 15:19:57.722114+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:54.657048
License: Public Domain

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                  _____________________________

                       Case No. 5D23-1537
                    LT Case No. 2022-DP-1496
                  _____________________________

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES and GUARDIAN AD
LITEM,

    Appellants,

    v.

R.V. a/k/a R.N., Mother of B.N.,
a Child,

    Appellee.
                  _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County.
Lawrence V. Johnston, Senior Judge.

Kelley Schaeffer, of Children’s Legal Services, Department of
Children and Families, Bradenton, for Appellant.

Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and
Amanda Victoria Glass, Senior Attorney, of Guardian ad Litem,
Tallahassee, for Guardian ad Litem Program.

No Appearance for Appellee.

                         October 19, 2023

WALLIS, J.
    In this dependency case, the Department of Children and
Families (“DCF”) and the Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Office
timely appeal an order granting the mother’s ore tenus motion for
judgment of dismissal made at the close of DCF’s case. We reverse.

     After a thorough review of the adjudicatory hearing
transcript, we agree with the appellants that DCF presented
prima facie evidence of prospective abuse under sections 39.01(2),
39.01(34)(g)2., and 39.507(7), Florida Statutes (2022).          The
uncontroverted evidence presented by DCF showed the following.
This is the second time DCF has taken custody of this child (“the
child”) in her first three years of life. The DCF investigator first
encountered the child staying with her paternal grandmother in a
home that smelled of marijuana and contained paraphernalia
accessible to the child. In fact, the child handed the investigator a
“vape” pen containing a brown liquid.

     After seven weeks of unsuccessfully attempting in-person
contact with the mother, the investigator contacted her and the
child at the child’s maternal grandfather’s home, which was
cluttered and smelled of animal feces. The mother admitted
avoiding the investigator because she did not want to submit to
“unnecessary” services to protect the child. The mother also denied
using any illicit substances.

     However, while the child was in the mother’s care, the mother
submitted to a drug test, which revealed positive results for
fentanyl, marijuana, buprenorphine, and benzodiazepine. The
mother admitted using these substances (except fentanyl), along
with Xanax, Suboxone, Tylenol 3, and Tramadol. She further
admitted using these substances without prescriptions, and over
prescribed limits, to self-medicate for diagnosed panic attacks and
anxiety, instead of taking properly prescribed and dosed
medications under the care of a psychiatrist. Due to the mother’s
current drug abuse, past history, avoidance of and refusal to
cooperate with DCF’s investigation, and mental health issues, the
investigator took custody of the child because she did not believe
the young child was safe in the mother’s care.

    We believe this was prima facie evidence of “extensive,
abusive, and chronic use of a controlled substance or alcohol by a
parent to the extent that the parent's ability to provide supervision

                                 2
and care for the child has been or is likely to be severely
compromised.” § 39.01(34)(g)2., Fla. Stat. (2022). Accordingly, we
reverse the dismissal order and remand for a new adjudicatory
hearing as to the mother. See In re A.B., 952 So. 2d 571, 574 (Fla.
2d DCA 2007) (reversing order dismissing dependency petition as
to child’s father because DCF presented prima facie case of
dependency; remanding for new adjudicatory hearing in part
because it was unclear whether trial court dismissed case as a
matter of law or after a weighing of the evidence).

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

EISNAUGLE and MACIVER, JJ., concur.

                 _____________________________

    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
               _____________________________

                                3