T. M. vs DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT In the Interest of C.S. and B.M., children. T.M., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES and GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, Appellees. Opinion filed July 8, 2020. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Patrice W. Moore, Circuit Judge. Kevin M. Schmitt of Schmitt Law, L.L.C., Tampa, for Appellant. Bernie McCabe, State Attorney, and Leslie M. Layne, Assistant State Attorney, Clearwater, for Appellee Department of Children and Families. Dwight O. Slater of Cohn Slater, P.A., Tallahassee; and Thomasina F. Moore, Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for Appellee Guardian ad Litem Program. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2D20-462 ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, Judge. T.M. (the Mother) appeals the final judgment terminating her parental rights. We affirm in all respects but remand for the trial court to correct certain scrivener's errors in the written judgment. The Mother pointed out the errors as an issue in her initial brief, and the Guardian ad Litem Program conceded that the proper remedy is to remand for correction. The trial court terminated the Mother's parental rights based on four of the grounds alleged in the petition seeking termination. Despite correctly addressing the substance of each statutory ground, however, the written judgment cites the incorrect subsections for three of the grounds. The citation to section 39.806(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2018), should be corrected to section 39.806(1)(e)(2); the citation to section 39.806(1)(c) should be corrected to section 39.806(1)(f); and the citation to section 39.806(1)(d) should be corrected to section 39.806(1)(e)(3). Correcting these scrivener's errors has no substantive effect because the trial court correctly addressed the substance of each statutory ground and made the appropriate factual findings. See Tunstall v. Gonzalez-Tunstall, 278 So. 3d 254, 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). Accordingly, we affirm and remand only for the correction of the scrivener's errors. See Rodriguez v. State, 223 So. 3d 1053, 1054-55 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). Affirmed and remanded with instructions. CASANUEVA and KELLY, JJ., Concur. -2-
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.
