Dior v. State

525 So. 2d 1036, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1379, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2341, 1988 WL 58512
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 7, 1988
DocketNo. 87-2309
StatusPublished

This text of 525 So. 2d 1036 (Dior v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dior v. State, 525 So. 2d 1036, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1379, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2341, 1988 WL 58512 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Where the defendant’s alleged profane statements were uttered out of the court’s hearing, the resulting conviction for direct criminal contempt was reversible error. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.830; Pugliese v. Pugliese, 347 So.2d 422 (Fla.1977). The State confesses the error.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Pugliese v. Pugliese
347 So. 2d 422 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
525 So. 2d 1036, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1379, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2341, 1988 WL 58512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dior-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.