Sylvester v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sylvester v. State

923 So. 2d 1289, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4646, 2006 WL 847101

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 31, 2006

DocketNo. 5D05-3281

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 923 So. 2d 1289 (Sylvester 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

Sylvester v. State, 923 So. 2d 1289, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4646, 2006 WL 847101 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

LAWSON, J.

John Sylvester appeals from an order finding him in indirect criminal contempt and sentencing him to six months of incarceration. The State concedes that the trial court committed fundamental error when it allowed Sylvester’s counsel to withdraw and then continued the contempt proceeding without appointing new counsel. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.840(d) (recognizing the defendant is entitled to counsel in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding); Mix v. State, 827 So.2d 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (noting. “[t]he procedures under rule 3.840 must be strictly followed before a person is found guilty of indirect criminal contempt”). Therefore, we reverse the contempt finding and sentence. The reversal is without prejudice to new proceedings being initiated in strict compliance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840.

REVERSED.

SAWAYA and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

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

LAWSON, J.

John Sylvester appeals from an order finding him in indirect criminal contempt and sentencing him to six months of incarceration. The State concedes that the trial court committed fundamental error when it allowed Sylvester’s counsel to withdraw and then continued the contempt proceeding without appointing new counsel. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.840(d) (recognizing the defendant is entitled to counsel in an indirect criminal contempt proceeding); Mix v. State, 827 So.2d 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (noting. “[t]he procedures under rule 3.840 must be strictly followed before a person is found guilty of indirect criminal contempt”). Therefore, we reverse the contempt finding and sentence. The reversal is without prejudice to new proceedings being initiated in strict compliance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840.

REVERSED.

SAWAYA and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

923 So. 2d 1289, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4646, 2006 WL 847101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sylvester-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack