Summary
affirming the termination of the father's parental rights because he did not preserve any issues by moving for a judgment of dismissal at either the close of DCF's case or at the close of his own
Summary of this case from P.R. v. Dep't of Children & FamiliesOpinion
No. 1D13–1234.
2013-07-24
O. T., Father of R. T., O.T. and S. T., minor children, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. David M. Gooding, Judge. Jeffrey L. Barrett, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Ward L. Metzger, Appellate Counsel, Children's Legal Services, Department of Children and Families, Jacksonville; Kelley Schaeffer, Appellate Counsel Guardian ad Litem Program, Sanford, for Appellee.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. David M. Gooding, Judge.
Jeffrey L. Barrett, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Ward L. Metzger, Appellate Counsel, Children's Legal Services, Department of Children and Families, Jacksonville; Kelley Schaeffer, Appellate Counsel Guardian ad Litem Program, Sanford, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The Appellant did not preserve any issues for appeal of the order terminating his parental rights, because he did not move for a judgment of dismissal below, either at the close of the Department's case or at the close of his own. See J.F.S. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 100 So.3d 784 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); J.M. v. Florida Dep't of Children & Families, 38 So.3d 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); K.J. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 33 So.3d 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); J.D. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 825 So.2d 447 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).
Because the Fourth and Fifth District Courts of Appeal disagree that a parent must preserve issues for appellate review via motion for judgment of dismissal, we certify conflict with R.P. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 49 So.3d 339 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); and H.D. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 964 So.2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), review dismissed,985 So.2d 1059 (Fla.2008).
AFFIRMED.