Court Opinion

ID: 9950220
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-13 16:03:57.624336+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:36:16.727868
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                        Opinion filed March 13, 2024.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                             No. 3D23-1587
                       Lower Tribunal No. 17-11780
                          ________________

                    Tamara Aissa Perez Morales,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                         Noel Guillermo Cruz,
                                  Appellee.

     An appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade
County, Marcia del Rey, Judge.

     JPA Law Firm, PLLC, and Jesse Philippe-Auguste, for appellant.

     Grass, Reyes & Associates, and Katushca M. Grass, for appellee.

Before SCALES, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ.

     MILLER, J.
     In this appeal, the mother challenges an order granting the father’s

emergency petition to temporarily relocate to Puerto Rico with the minor

children. Although she originally informally agreed to the relocation, the

mother now asserts the underlying petition was defective and the corollary

order fails for a lack of competent, substantial evidence. As to the former

contention, the undeveloped record before us does not establish that the

claimed deficiencies were properly preserved for appellate review. See

Hoirup v. Hoirup, 862 So. 2d 780, 782 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Esaw v. Esaw,

965 So. 2d 1261, 1267 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). As to the latter, we conclude

the comprehensive findings rendered in the challenged order are legally

sufficient and well-supported by the testimony and exhibits adduced at the

hearing. 1 See Sanabria v. Sanabria, 271 So. 3d 1101, 1102 (Fla. 3d DCA

2019); Ryan v. Ryan, 252 So. 3d 272, 273 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); Norris v.

Heckerman, 972 So. 2d 1098, 1099 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). Accordingly, we

affirm the order under review.

     Affirmed.

1
  We summarily conclude the challenged text messages were properly
admitted under the hearsay exception for a “party’s own statement in . . . an
individual . . . capacity.” § 90.803(18)(a), Fla. Stat. (2023).

                                     2