ALFREDO GUARDADO AND MARIO GARCIA, APPELLANTS,
v.
RUTH E. GUARDADO, ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
The court quashed direct criminal contempt orders against Alfredo Guardado and his attorney Mario Garcia because the orders failed to recite the facts supporting the adjudication of guilt as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830.
Direct criminal contempt orders must contain a signed, written order with a recital of the facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based, and orders lacking this requirement must be quashed.
[1] Direct criminal contempt orders imposing punishment rather than coerced compliance must comply with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830 by containing a signed writte…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAlfredo Guardado was ordered to perform 80 hours of community service for lying under oath, and his attorney Mario Garcia was ordered to pay $200 to t…
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
THOMPSON, C.J.
Alfredo Guardado and his attorney, Mario Garcia, appeal orders of direct contempt entered against them. We quash the orders without reaching the merits because the orders are deficient on their face.
The order against Guardado requires him to perform 80 hours of community service “for lying under oath.” The order against the attorney requires payment of $200 to the clerk of the court for his “being argumentative and disrespectful during court proceedings.” Because these orders provide for punishment rather than coerced compliance with a court order, we conclude that they are direct criminal contempt orders. See Carnival Corp. v. Beverly, 744 So. 2d 489, 496 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830 governs proceedings in cases of direct criminal contempt. Durant v. Boone, 509 So. 2d 1275, 1276 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Scrupulous compliance with rule 3.830 is required. Carnival Corp., 744 So. 2d at 497. Rule 3.830 requires entry of a signed, written order containing a recital of the facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based. This requirement assures compliance with the longstanding rule that the powers of contempt should be exercised with care and circumspection. Williams v. State, 698 So. 2d 1350, 1351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). In the instant case, we quash the orders of contempt because they do not set forth the facts upon which they are based. Compare Montoya v. State, 695 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
ORDERS OF CONTEMPT QUASHED.
PETERSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hutcheson v. State, 903 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…a signed, written order containing a recital of facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based “assures compliance with the long standing rule that the powers of contempt should be exercised with care and circumspection.” Guardado v. Guardado, 813 So. 2d 236, 237 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), citing Williams v. State, 698 So. 2d 1350, 1351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Further, the failure to follow the procedural requirements in contempt proceedings is fundamental error. See Garrett v. State, 876 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 1st DCA…
-
J.A.H. v. State of Fla. & Dep't of Child. & Families, 20 So. 3d 425 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…al of the contempt judgment. See Hutcheson v. State, 903 So. 2d 1060, 1062 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). Rule 3.830 requires a signed written order containing a recital of the facts upon which the adjudication of contempt is based. See Guardado v. Guardado, 813 So. 2d 236, 237 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). A recital has been defined as a “retelling in detail; a narration.” See Johnson v. State, 584 So. 2d 95, 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (reversing order of contempt that referenced numerous pages of trial transcript because it was…
-
Keeton v. Bryant, 877 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…a. 2d DCA 2002) (citing Bouie v. State, 784 So. 2d 521, 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)). “The provisions of rule 3.830 define the essence of due process in criminal contempt proceedings and must be scrupulously followed.” Id; see also Guardado v. Guardado, 813 So. 2d 236, 237 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (scrupulous compliance with rule 3.830 is required). Because of the errors noted above, we are bound to vacate the contempt order. REVERSED and REMANDED. PLEUS and PALMER, JJ., concur. . See e.g., American Fiber & Finishi…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Carnival Corp. v. Beverly, 744 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Doyle Williams v. State, 698 So. 2d 1350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Montoya v. State, 695 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- Durant v. The Honorable Eddie Boone, 509 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)