Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Domestic Violence

According to a recent Florida domestic violence appellate case, “Where an injunction is sought by a victim of domestic violence based on completed acts, the petitioner is not required to establish reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of any act of domestic violence.” Whitlock v. Veltcamp, 1D19-3780 (Fla. 1st DCA May 6, 2020).

The parties divorced and approximately one year later, the former wife filed a petition for an injunction. She alleged several incidents of stalking against the former husband which included three incidents that occurred in the month prior to the hearing, and numerous other, past incidents. The former wife presented evidence of text messages from the former husband accusing the former wife “of having a disease, urging her to hang herself, stating that [the former husband] ‘checked on’ the [parties’] minor child every day while the child was with [the former wife] describing his sexual activities with girlfriends, and other offensive and disturbing communications with no legitimate purpose. The messages included photos of a noose, firearms, and a shell casing [the former husband] instructed [the former wife] to show to their son.” The court also accepted into evidence a video of the former husband inside the former wife’s home, uninvited in which the former wife repeatedly told the former husband to leave. Based on this, the court entered an injunction in favor of the former wife. The former husband appealed, arguing there was insufficient evidence to support the entry of the injunction, the court erred in granting the former wife full time-sharing with the parties’ child, and the court committed error in prohibiting the former husband from possession firearms because it would cause him to lose his civilian job related to the military.

The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision. First, the appellate court held “Because the statutory definition of ‘domestic violence’ includes a wide range of actions, including stalking in its three forms, Whitlock fails to demonstrate that the testimony and exhibits presented by Veltkamp were legally insufficient to demonstrate an act or acts of domestic violence by stalking to support the final judgment of injunction. Additionally, the trial court had evidence of recent incidents of stalking by Whitlock so that the violence here was not too remote to support the entry of the injunction.” Next with regard to the firearms prohibition, the appellate court held there was no error where the former husband “did not testify that he was a certified state or local officer who uses firearms to perform his official duties on behalf of his employer” in accordance with section 790.233 of the Florida Statutes. Last, regarding the time-sharing argument, the appellate court held the former husband “fails to show that the trial court misapplied section 741.30(6)(a)3., Florida Statutes. In entering the injunction, the trial court was allowed to provide Veltkamp with ‘100 percent of the time-sharing’ pending further court orders.”

If you need the protection of a domestic violence injunction, contact a Miami domestic violence lawyer to understand your best options in moving forward.