Porter v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Porter v. State

632 So. 2d 105, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 785, 1994 WL 34074

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 8, 1994

DocketNo. 92-166

StatusPublished

This text of 632 So. 2d 105 (Porter 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

Porter v. State, 632 So. 2d 105, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 785, 1994 WL 34074 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant claims numerous errors relating to both the substantive offenses and numerous contempt citations.

As far as the contempt citations are concerned, the record reflects that the trial court erred in failing to comply with the provisions of Rule 3.830 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Jackson v. State, 626 So.2d 1060 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Peters v. State, 626 So.2d 1048 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Accordingly, the adjudications of contempt, and the sentences imposed in connection therewith, are reversed.

As far as the conviction for the substantive criminal offense is concerned, we affirm. The record clearly reflects that all of the situations about which the appellant complains were either invited or created by him or constituted harmless error, if error at all when the trial proceedings are viewed as a whole.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

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