Court Opinion

ID: 9400107
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-07 15:04:55.446205+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:42.278579
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                             FOURTH DISTRICT

                            K.B., the mother,
                               Appellant,

                                     v.

           DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES and
                 GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM,
                          Appellees.

                              No. 4D23-477

                              [June 7, 2023]

  Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Saint
Lucie County; Michael J. Linn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562022DP000206.

  Antony P. Ryan, Regional Counsel, and Richard G. Bartmon, Assistant
Regional Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Council,
Fourth District, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

  Andrew Feigenbaum of Children’s Legal Services, West Palm Beach, for
appellee Department of Children and Families.

   Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb and Sarah Todd Weitz of Statewide Guardian
ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for appellee Guardian ad Litem.

PER CURIAM.

  Affirmed. See E.A. v. Dep’t Child. & Fams., 332 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2021); V.S. v. Dep’t Child. & Fams., 322 So. 3d 1153 (Fla. 4th DCA
2021).

MAY and GERBER, JJ., concur.
WARNER, J., concurs specially with opinion.

WARNER, J., concurring specially.

    I concur in the affirmance of the final judgment terminating appellant’s
rights to her child, as I am bound by V.S. and E.A. which are controlling
in this district. I continue to maintain, however, as I did in my dissent in
V.S., that the Legislature cannot abrogate the principles set forth in
Padgett v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 577 So. 2d 565
(Fla. 1991), required to assure that the fundamental liberty interest of a
parent to his or her child is protected. Only the supreme court can
determine whether the constitutional interests of the parents are
sufficiently protected under the statutes. In this case, the trial court did
not conduct a least restrictive means inquiry, only making a conclusory
finding that termination was the least restrictive means, based on E.A. v.
Department of Children and Families, 332 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),
and section 39.806(2), Florida Statutes (2022).

                           *         *         *

   Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                                     2