Full Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed June 3, 2020. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D20-116 Lower Tribunal No. 19-15242 ________________ R.S., the mother, Appellant, vs. Department of Children and Families, et al., Appellees. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Carlos Lopez, Judge. Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third Region, and Kevin Coyle Colbert, Assistant Regional Counsel, for appellant. Laura J. Lee and Thomasina F. Moore (Tallahassee), for Guardian ad Litem Program; Karla F. Perkins, for the Department of Children and Families, for appellees. Before SALTER, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ. PER CURIAM. The Florida Department of Children and Families filed a petition below seeking an order adjudicating seven-month old, S.S., dependent as to R.S., the child’s mother. X-rays of the baby revealed corner fractures in both legs, an indicator of child abuse. R.S., who shared sole caregiving responsibility with the father, could not explain the fractures. The trial court, in its December 12, 2019 Order of Adjudication, found R.S. to be credible.1 Nonetheless, in its detailed order, the trial court, relying on the testimony of the multiple medical experts who treated the child, found the child dependent pursuant to section 39.01(15)(a) of the Florida Statutes. Specifically, the trial court found that both child abuse and medical neglect occurred. See § 39.01(2), (35), (47), (50), Fla. Stat. (2019). As we did in the father’s appeal of the dependency order directed toward him, see H.S.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, Case No. 3D20-91, 2020 WL 2464750 (Fla. 3d DCA May 13, 2020), we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion as to the mother. L.J. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 273 So. 3d 1123, 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019). A trial court’s dependency ruling will be upheld when the trial court applies the correct law and the ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence. Y.P. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 939 So. 2d 1118, 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); see J.V. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 967 So. 2d 354, 356 1 “The purpose of a petition seeking the adjudication of a child as a dependent child is the protection of the child and not the punishment of the person creating the condition of dependency.” § 39.501(2), Fla. Stat. (2019). 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (recognizing sufficiency of evidence to support dependency ruling when parents, the sole caregivers, cannot explain baby’s traumatic injury). Affirmed. 3