From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

R.L. v. Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 11, 2007
955 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

Opinion

No. 5D06-3691.

May 11, 2007.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County, John Griesbaum, Judge.

Peter T. Hickey, Sanford, for Appellant.

Charles D. Peters, Department of Children and Families, Orlando, for Appellee, Department of Children and Families.

Mercedes E. Scopetta, Orlando, for Appellee, Guardian ad Litem.


AFFIRMED.

[T]he existence of a long-term relative placement is not the "dispositive constitutional consideration" in applying the least restrictive means test. Nor is the least restrictive means test intended to preserve the parental bonds at the cost of a child's future. Instead, this test requires that "those measures short of termination should be utilized if such measures can permit the safe reestablishment of the parent-child bond." The "clear purpose" of the least restrictive means test is "reestablishment of the parent-child bond."

A.J. v. K.A.O., 951 So.2d 30 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (citations omitted).

GRIFFIN, THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

R.L. v. Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 11, 2007
955 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)
Case details for

R.L. v. Department of Children & Families

Case Details

Full title:R.L., Father of C.F. and M.S., Children, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: May 11, 2007

Citations

955 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

Citing Cases

Z.C. v. K.D.

In this case, we conclude that the trial court misapplied the least restrictive means test. As was stated…

S.M. v. Fla. Dep't of Children & Families

This interpretation is also consistent with the views of the other appellate courts:Although the children…