Opinion
No. 3D21-906
09-01-2021
E.A.V., the mother, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, et al., Appellees.
Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third Region, and Kevin Coyle Colbert, Assistant Regional Counsel, for appellant. Karla Perkins, for appellee Department of Children and Families; Thomasina F. Moore and Laura J. Lee (Tallahassee), for appellee Guardian ad Litem.
Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third Region, and Kevin Coyle Colbert, Assistant Regional Counsel, for appellant.
Karla Perkins, for appellee Department of Children and Families; Thomasina F. Moore and Laura J. Lee (Tallahassee), for appellee Guardian ad Litem.
Before SCALES, HENDON, and LOBREE, JJ.
HENDON, J.
Affirmed. See Fla. Dep't of Children & Families v. A.R., 253 So. 3d 1158, 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (holding appellate review of a termination of parental rights case is highly deferential and a finding that evidence is clear and convincing enjoys a presumption of correctness and will not be overturned on appeal unless clearly erroneous or lacking in evidentiary support); J.E. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 126 So. 3d 424, 427 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) ("While a trial court's decision to terminate parental rights must be based on clear and convincing evidence, our review is limited to whether competent substantial evidence supports the trial court's judgment."); J.P. v. Fla. Dep't of Children & Families, 183 So. 3d 1198, 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (holding where the trial court made full findings on all statutory factors and found that termination of parental rights was in the child's manifest best interest, the appellate court should not re-weigh the evidence).