MANUEL LOPEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Manuel Lopez was convicted of direct criminal contempt by a trial judge based on alleged contemptuous conduct that occurred a week earlier before a different judge and outside the judge's presence or hearing. The court reversed the conviction, holding that direct criminal contempt can only be summarily adjudicated when the conduct occurs in the actual presence of the judge adjudicating the contempt.
A trial judge may not summarily adjudicate a defendant guilty of direct criminal contempt unless the conduct constituting the contempt took place in the actual presence of that same judge. The rule requiring the conduct to occur "in open court" means it must occur before the specific judge and court adjudicating the contempt, not merely any judge or any open court.
[1] A trial court may exercise its contempt powers as a sanction against the filing of unmeritorious petitions containing perjured statements or against perjured statements m…
[2] Direct criminal contempt is governed by CrPR 1.830 and applies when the court sees or hears the conduct constituting the contempt committed in its actual presence.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial judge may not summarily adjudicate a defendant guilty of direct criminal contempt when the alleged contemptuous conduct took place not in his presence or within his hearing, but, in fact, took place a week before the instant proceedings and before a different trial judge.”
Establishes the core holding that the adjudicating judge must personally witness or hear the contemptuous conduct
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe alleged contemptuous conduct took place in open court approximately one week before the contempt proceedings at issue. The conduct occurred before…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Direct Criminal Contempt cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
A trial judge may not summarily adjudicate a defendant guilty of direct criminal contempt when the alleged contemptuous conduct took place not in his presence or within his hearing, but, in fact, took place a week before the instant proceedings and before a different trial judge. Rule 3.830 Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.1
The state contends that because the alleged contemptuous acts took place in open court it was an offense that could be considered as a direct criminal contempt by any judge at any time. We reject this contention. The first sentence of Rule 3.830 speaks of the court, but the last two sentences speak of the judge and clearly the rule can only be interpreted to mean that the conduct takes place in open court before a judge and that the judge and court must be the same.
The conviction of direct criminal contempt under review is reversed without prejudice to proceed against the appellant under Rule 3.840.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
. A criminal contempt may be punished summarily if the court saw or heard the conduct constituting the contempt committed in the actual presence of the court. The judgment of guilt of contempt shall include a recital of those facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based. Prior to the adjudication of guilt the judge shall inform the defendant of the accusation against him and inquire as to whether he has any cause to show why he should not be adjudged guilty of contempt by the Court and sentenced therefor. The defendant shall be given the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances. The judgment shall be signed by the judge and entered of record. Sentence shall be pronounced in open court. Emphasis added.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Guzman v. State, 489 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…summarily adjudicate defendant guilty of direct criminal contempt when the alleged contemptuous conduct took place, not in his presence or within his hearing, but in fact took place at another time and before a different trial judge. Lopez v. State, 423 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Rule 3.830 Fla.R.Crim.P. Therefore we reverse the adjudication of direct criminal contempt here under review. Reversed.…
-
E.T. v. State, 587 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…ere the alleged conduct took place, not in the presence of the judge, but at an earlier time and before a different trial judge. Deltoro v. State, 534 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Guzman v. State, 489 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Lopez v. State, 423 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).1 Although Judge Brooke correctly defined the alleged contempt as indirect, the record makes clear that appellant was given none of the procedural protections due her under the applicable rule. Rather than having a hearing to det…1 / 2
-
Deltoro v. State, 534 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…PER CURIAM. The State concedes, properly, that the holdings in Guzman v. State, 489 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), and Lopez v. State, 423 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), control this appeal. A trial judge may not summarily adjudicate a defendant guilty of direct criminal contempt when the alleged contemptuous conduct took place, not in his presence or within his hearing, but in fact took place at…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence