IN RE N.V., A CHILD. J.M.V., APPELLANT,
v.
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.
J.M.V. appealed a criminal contempt conviction for failure to pay child support, challenging a 100-day jail sentence with a $4,050 purge amount. The court reversed because the trial court failed to make a separate affirmative finding that J.M.V. had present ability to pay the purge amount, and the finding of indigency for appeal purposes established he lacked that ability.
The court reversed because the trial court failed to make the required separate affirmative finding of present ability to pay the purge amount. The finding of indigency for appeal purposes affirmatively established that J.M.V. lacked present ability to pay the purge amount at the time the contempt order was entered.
[1] A contempt sentence that includes a period of incarceration before a purge amount is payable is hybrid, containing both criminal and civil elements.
[2] A criminal contempt sentence is intended to punish for an intentional violation of a court order.
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“The purpose of criminal contempt ... is to punish. Criminal contempt proceedings are utilized to vindicate the authority of the court or to punish for an intentional violation of an order of the court.”
Distinguishes criminal contempt as punitive in purpose, establishing that the unconditional portion of J.M.V.'s sentence was criminal in nature.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court found J.M.V. guilty of criminal contempt for failure to pay court-ordered child support. The court sentenced him to 100 days in county…
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 Present Ability To Pay cases and more on FLexlaw
DAVIS, Judge.
J.M.V. challenges the trial court’s final judgment, adjudicating him guilty of criminal contempt for failure to pay child support and sentencing him to 100 days’ county jail with a $4050 purge amount payable after serving twenty-five days in jail. We reverse.
Although the trial court styled its contempt order “Judgment of Guilt and Sentence of Criminal Contempt of Court,” in actuality, it fashioned a hybrid sentence, employing both its criminal and civil contempt powers. Because the trial court required J.M.V. to serve the first twenty-five days of the sentence before paying any purge amount, that portion of the sentence is criminal in nature. See Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274, 1277 (Fla.1985) (“The purpose of criminal contempt ... is to punish. Criminal contempt proceedings are utilized to vindicate the authority of the court or to punish for an intentional violation of an order of the court.”). However, because J.M.V. can avoid the remainder of his sentence by paying the purge amount, that portion of his sentence is in fact civil in nature. See id. (“[T]he purpose of a civil contempt proceeding is to obtain compliance on the part of a person subject to an order of the court.”).
If the trial court finds that a person has failed to pay the child support previously ordered by the court at a time when he had the financial ability to do so, the court may, in addition to or in lieu of punishing the person, enter a civil contempt order of incarceration to obtain compliance. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274. However, before doing so, the trial court must set a purge amount and make a finding that the person has the present ability to pay whatever purge amount the trial court sets. Id.
Once the court finds that a civil contempt has occurred, it must determine what alternatives are appropriate to obtain compliance with the court order. If incarceration is deemed appropriate, the court must make a separate, affirmative finding that the contemnor possesses the present ability to comply with the purge conditions set forth in the contempt order. Id. at 1279.
In this case, although the trial court made the finding that J.M.V. was able to make the support payments as they were due, it did not make a separate, affirmative finding regarding J.M.V.’s present ability to pay the $4050 purge amount. Furthermore, the trial court’s finding that J.M.V. was indigent for purposes of appeal affirmatively establishes that at the time the contempt order was entered he did not have the ability to pay the purge amount. See id. (“The finding of the trial judge that the respondent was indigent for purposes of the appeal affirmatively establishes that the respondent was indigent and had no present ability to pay the purge amount.”). As such, we must reverse.
Reversed.
ALTENBERND, C.J., and WALLACE, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Granell v. Granell, 940 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…der him to pay the Former Wife’s medical expenses without finding that he has the present ability to pay the expenses. See Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274, 1279 (Fla.1985); see also Fla. Fam. L.R.P. 12.615(c)(2)(A), (d)(1), (e); In re N.V. v. State, 890 So. 2d 1232, 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Giallanza v. Dep’t of Revenue, 799 So. 2d 256, 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Accordingly, we reverse and remand, noting that it appears likely further evidentiary proceedings will be required in order to address the Former Husban…
Authorities Cited
- Eugenia Bowen & the Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 1985)