Haft v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Haft v. State

458 So. 2d 1228, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2457, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16354

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 21, 1984·No. No. 83-2255·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There is no error in the judgment that Norman F. Haft is guilty of criminal contempt. The appropriate fine for such an offense cannot exceed $500, however, the fine imposed here was $2,500. Section 775.02, Florida Statutes (1983); Aaron v. State, 284 So.2d 673 (Fla.1973) and Thomas A. Edison College, Inc. v. State Board of Independent Colleges & Universities, 411 So.2d 257 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Thus, the order appealed is remanded to the trial court with directions to reduce the fine to not more than $500.00. In all other respects, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

There is no error in the judgment that Norman F. Haft is guilty of criminal contempt. The appropriate fine for such an offense cannot exceed $500, however, the fine imposed here was $2,500. Section 775.02, Florida Statutes (1983); Aaron v. State, 284 So.2d 673 (Fla.1973) and Thomas A. Edison College, Inc. v. State Board of Independent Colleges & Universities, 411 So.2d 257 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Thus, the order appealed is remanded to the trial court with directions to reduce the fine to not more than $500.00. In all other respects, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.

Haft v. State, 458 So. 2d 1228, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2457, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16354 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

458 So. 2d 1228 (Haft v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related