MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800

Defendant's Attorney:
Lawrence J. Marraffino of Lawrence J. Marraffino, P.A.

Description:

Tallahassee, FL - Divorce lawyer represented Appellant with appealing the order of sole parental responsibility and total timesharing to the mother.

The biological father of these parties’ very young daughter
appeals the trial court’s order awarding sole parental
responsibility and total timesharing to the mother. The trial court
properly admitted into evidence the child’s hearsay statements
disclosing sexual abuse by her father. See § 90.803(23)(a)1., Fla.
Stat. (2020) (listing factors for deciding to admit child hearsay).
The father has not provided a transcript or statement in lieu of
transcript of the evidentiary hearing preceding the court’s decision
to admit the child hearsay, but the court summarized the evidence
and findings of that hearing at the beginning of the trial on the
mother’s paternity petition. The record reflects the child’s
statements and actions consistent with sexual abuse, physical
evidence suggesting sexual abuse following her time with the
father, and the father’s troubling statement to the mother that
“They [law enforcement and the Department of Children and
Families] couldn’t catch me then [at the time of the abuse], so what
are you going to do about it now?”. The record supports the trial
court’s finding that the father sexually abused the child, which in
turn supports the judgment appealed.
We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s refusal
to provide the father a path to reunification. See C.N. v. I.G.C., 316
So. 3d 287, 288 (Fla. 2021) (holding that “there is no such
requirement” that a trial court “must give a parent ‘concrete steps’
to restore lost time-sharing”); Dukes v. Griffin, 230 So. 3d 155,
156–57 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding trial court does not err in
failing to provide path to reunification when parent’s timesharing
is suspended)

Outcome: AFFIRMED

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: