Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

929 So. 2d 622

Docket No. 3D05-1045.

Hibbert v. State

George C. HIBBERT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 10, 2006.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2006-05-10

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2013

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“1. Direct criminal contempt may be punished summarily if the court saw or heard the conduct constituting the contempt committed in the actual presence of the court. 2. The judgment of guilt for contempt shall include a recital of those facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based. 3. Prior to the adjudication of guilt, the judge shall inform the defendant of the accusation against him or her and inquire as to whether the defendant has any cause to show why he or she should not be adjudged guilty of contempt by the court and sentenced therefor. 4. The defendant shall be given the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances [before sentencing], 5. The judgment shall be signed by the judge and entered of record. 6. The sentence shall be pronounced in open court.”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Searcy v. State, Woodson v. State

Relies on 876 So. 2d 24 - Garrett v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-05-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Godfrey, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

¶2Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and William J. Selinger, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

¶3Before LEVY, GERSTEN, and FLETCHER, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5George Hibbert ("Hibbert"), appeals his judgment and sentence for direct criminal contempt. We reverse.

¶6Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830 requires the trial judge to inform the defendant of the accusation of criminal contempt and inquire whether the defendant has cause to show why he should not be held in contempt and sentenced. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.830. Rule 3.830 also requires the trial judge to give the defendant the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances before the sentencing. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.830.

¶7Here, the trial judge asked Hibbert to show cause why he should not be held in direct criminal contempt. However, the trial judge did not give Hibbert an opportunity to present evidence of mitigating circumstances or to discuss why the trial judge should or should not impose a particular *623 sentence. Thus, the trial judge failed to follow the procedural requirements, which is fundamental error. See Garrett v. State,876 So.2d 24 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

¶8Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's judgment and sentence for proper criminal contempt proceedings.

¶9Reversed and remanded.

/929/so2d/622 · .json · Public domain