D.M., father of K.M. and K.M., Minor Children, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (2023)

D.M. appeals a trial court order terminating his parental rights. The basis for the termination was section 39.806(1)(e)(1), failure to substantially comply with his case plan. Substantial compliance is obtained when “the circumstances which caused the creation of the case plan have been significantly remedied to the extent that the well-being and safety of the child will not be endangered upon the child's remaining with or being returned to the child's parent.” § 39.01(84), Fla. Stat.

D.M.’s children were taken from him because he lacked stable housing. He relied on the children's mother for housing, but they were sheltered from her due to abuse. D.M.’s children had been in foster care for four years at the time of the termination hearing. And he still had not provided housing for them. D.M. also had a history of domestic violence and was facing an attempted homicide charge for chasing down a person in the road and firing a gun multiple times in their direction. These allegations were supported by testimony at the termination hearing.

To terminate a person's parental rights, the elements required for termination must be established by clear and convincing evidence. § 39.809(1), Fla. Stat. The trial court determined the elements of section 39.806(1)(e)(1) were met by clear and convincing evidence because “the circumstances which caused the creation of the case plan ha[d] [not] been significantly remedied.” § 39.01(84), Fla. Stat. “[A] trial court's determination that evidence is clear and convincing will not be overturned unless it may be said as a matter of law that no one could reasonably find such evidence to be clear and convincing.” In Interest of D.J.S., 563 So. 2d 655, 662 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). We cannot say that here.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM.

KELSEY, NORDBY, and LONG, JJ., concur.