D.T., MOTHER OF M.M., A CHILD vs DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED D.T., MOTHER OF M.M., A CHILD, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D21-1564 LT Case No. 2018-DP-588 DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed October 8, 2021 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, A. James Craner, Judge. Samuel T. Lea, of Law Office of Samuel T. Lea, Orlando, for Appellant. Kelley Schaeffer, of Children’s Legal Services, Department of Children and Families, Bradenton, for Appellee. Lynn James Hinson, of Guardian ad Litem, Orlando, for Guardian ad Litem Program. SASSO, J. D.T. (“Mother”) appeals the order terminating her parental rights as to M.M., challenging all three prongs required for termination of parental rights. 1 We affirm in all respects but remand for the trial court to correct scrivener’s errors in the written judgment, which Mother identified in her initial brief and the Florida Department of Children and Families (“DCF”) concedes require entry of a corrected order. In its petition, DCF alleged termination grounds under sections 39.806(1)(e)1., 39.806(1)(e)2., and 39.806(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2021), and at trial, the court orally found that DCF proved all three of those grounds by clear and convincing evidence. In its written order, however, the court identified the supporting grounds as sections 39.806(1)(e)1., 39.806(1)(e)2., and 39.806(1)(e)3., and made no mention of section 39.806(1)(c). Because the trial court’s determination is supported by competent substantial evidence, and Mother fails to demonstrate reversible error as to those findings, we conclude the identified error is a scrivener’s error. See, e.g., T.V. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 318 So. 3d 649, 650 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021) (remanding for correction of scrivener’s error where trial court’s order terminating father’s parental rights cited incorrect statutory ground for termination but correctly addressed the substance of each statutory ground and made the appropriate factual findings as to the termination of parental rights). 2 We therefore remand for the entry of an amended final judgment to reflect the court’s oral pronouncements as to the appropriate grounds for termination. AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions. HARRIS and TRAVER, JJ., concur. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
