Maniatakos v. Hirsch

106 So. 3d 953, 2013 WL 85447, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 315
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 9, 2013·No. No. 4D11-355·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant contends, and the State properly concedes, that the trial court erred in summarily adjudicating appellant guilty of direct criminal contempt without complying with the procedures set forth in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830. See Bouie v. State, 784 So.2d 521, 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Contrary to appellant’s argument, we find the personal insults and charges of corruption directed towards the trial judge at the conclusion of the hearing were contemptuous on their face. See Martin v. State, 711 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Accordingly, we remand for further proceedings during which appellant may be given the opportunity to show cause why he should not be adjudged guilty of contempt and to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances in compliance with Rule 3.830.

Reversed and remanded.

POLEN, STEVENSON and CONNER, JJ., concur.

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

Maniatakos v. Hirsch, 106 So. 3d 953, 2013 WL 85447, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 315 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

106 So. 3d 953 (Maniatakos v. Hirsch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alex Diaz De La Portilla v. State of Florida
142 So. 3d 928 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)