¶1Appellant seeks reversal of an order of direct criminal contempt. Because the lower court failed to inquire as to whether appellant had any cause to show why he should not be adjudicated guilty of contempt and failed to give appellant an opportunity to present excusing or mitigating evidence, as required by Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.830, the judgment of direct criminal contempt must be REVERSED. Clark v. State, 625 So.2d 68, 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Our reversal is without prejudice to the institution of proper contempt proceedings.
668 So. 2d 346
Royster v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided February 28, 1996
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1996-02-28
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 2005
1 state decisions
Relies on 625 So. 2d 68 - Clark v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1996-02-28
View the full empirical analysis of this case →