Davis v. State

595 So. 2d 302, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2828, 1992 WL 55254
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Davis v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 543 So. 2d 437
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 24, 1992·No. No. 91-1807·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James Bernard Davis, the defendant, was adjudicated guilty of direct criminal contempt, pursuaht to Rule 3.830 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, for abusive language. The Court sentenced the defendant to six months imprisonment. The defendant contends that the trial court did not conduct a proper hearing, as is required by Rule 3.830, before summarily [303]*303adjudicating him guilty of direct contempt of court. We agree.

Rule 3.830 requires that:
[p]rior to the adjudication of guilt the judge shall inform the defendant of the accusation against him and inquire as to whether he has any cause to show why he should not be adjudged guilty of contempt by the Court and sentenced therefor. The defendant shall be given the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances.

The record shows that the trial court failed to follow the clear provisions of Rule 3.830. Therefore, the adjudication of contempt is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with the provisions of Rule 3.830.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Davis v. State, 595 So. 2d 302, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2828, 1992 WL 55254 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

595 So. 2d 302 (Davis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.