RALPH ROMANO, APPELLANT,
v.
CONCETTA RUSSO, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Willful Violation Of Court Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ralph Romano appeals an adjudication for indirect criminal contempt. It appears uncontroverted that the order signed by the trial court materially differed from the court’s oral ruling at the hearing on November 20, 1992; that the appellant father did not receive actual notice of the new ruling until presented with the written order on November 27, 1992; that at that time he was unable to comply with the written visitation order as to the daughter; and that he did comply with the court’s oral and written visitation orders as to the son. We conclude that the record does not support a determination, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the father wilfully disobeyed the court’s order. See Hunnefeld v. Futch, 557 So. 2d 916, 917 (Fla. 4th DCA1990); Scrimshaw v. State, 592 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA1992); Barnes v. State, 588 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. 4th DCA1991).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. J.G., 740 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…State, 674 So. 2d at 99. “Where the State requests a continuance due to the unavailability of a witness and the delay would not prejudice the defendant, a dismissal constitutes an extreme, sanction if less severe alternatives exist.” State v. R.P., 620 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). A ten day continuance certainly would have been a less severe alternative to dismissal. The trial court should have, at the very least, considered the State’s request. Reversed.…
-
Wells v. State, 654 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…ence to be irrelevant. Relevant evidence is “evidence tending to prove or disprove a material fact.” § 90.401, Fla.Stat. (1993). Here the allegation of indirect criminal contempt requires the willful violation of a court order. See Romano v. Russo, 620 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Scrimshaw v. State, 592 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Hunnefeld v. Futch, [*148] 557 So. 2d 916 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Intent necessarily is an essential element of contempt. Paul v. Johnson, 604 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Th…
Authorities Cited
- Hunnefeld v. Honorable Daniel Futch, 557 So. 2d 916 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Barnes v. State, 588 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Robey v. Biscayne BAY Yacht Club, 592 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Scrimshaw v. State, 592 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)