DONALD O. CARTER, 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.
The court affirmed Carter's cocaine possession conviction but reversed his criminal contempt conviction, finding insufficient evidence of willful failure to appear where his unrebutted testimony showed his attorney told him attendance was unnecessary.
Criminal contempt requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a willful act calculated to hinder the court or obstruct justice, with intent to obstruct that can be inferred from actions, but the evidence here was insufficient to prove willful failure to appear.
[1] Criminal contempt requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a willful act or omission calculated to embarrass or hinder the court or obstruct justice, with intent to ob…
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 intelligence“Criminal contempt is a crime and guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Establishing the standard for criminal contempt convictions, citing Forbes v. State.
Carter was charged with possession of cocaine and driving without a license following a traffic stop, convicted by jury, and then held in direct crimi…
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 Willful Act Or Omission cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Following a traffic stop, Donald 0. Carter was charged with possession of cocaine and driving without a license. A jury found Carter guilty as charged. Thereafter, during his sentencing hearing, the judge held Carter in direct criminal contempt as a consequence of his failure to appear for an earlier docket call, sentencing him to time served. In this appeal, Carter challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for possession of cocaine and the contempt. We affirm the possession of cocaine conviction without further comment. We find merit, however, in Carter’s claim concerning the contempt adjudication.
“Criminal contempt is a crime” and guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Forbes v. State, 933 So. 2d 706, 712 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). To establish criminal contempt, the evidence must establish a “willful act or omission calculated to embarrass or hinder the court or obstruct the administration of justice.” Id. “There must be proof that the accused intended to hinder or obstruct the administration of justice.” Id. Such intent can be inferred from the accused’s actions. See id. We have reviewed the record in this ease and find the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate Carter willfully failed to appear before the court. Carter’s sworn testimony that his court-appointed attorney told him he did not need to attend the docket call was unrebutted in the record.
Affirmed in Part and Reversed in Part.
STEVENSON, C.J., KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
G.G.J. v. State, 28 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…an abuse of discretion standard. Haynes v. State, 944 So. 2d 417, 420 n. 3 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (citation omitted). An order of direct criminal contempt for failure to appear requires a showing that the failure to appear was willful. Carter v. State, 954 So. 2d 1185, 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). The state presented no evidence that G.G.J. willfully failed to appear. Therefore, the circuit court abused its discretion in holding G.G.J. in direct criminal contempt.1 Reversed. TAYLOR and LEVINE, JJ., concur.…
-
J.D.J. v. State, 120 So. 3d 229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…venile in direct criminal contempt absent evidence of willful conduct. G.G.J. v. State, 28 So. 3d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). The conduct must also demonstrate “the accused intended to hinder or obstruct the administration of justice.” Carter v. State, 954 So. 2d 1185, 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). In Carter, we explained that where the unrebutted evidence demonstrates that a defendant was told by his court-appointed counsel that it was unnecessary for him to attend docket call, there is insufficient evidence of will…
-
Thomas v. State, 175 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…n contempt of court and prohibited Thomas from the further filing of any pro se pleadings or papers related to lower tribunal case number 03-5870. Thomas filed the instant appeal. We affirm the order finding Thomas in contempt. See Carter v. State, 954 So. 2d 1185,1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“To establish criminal contempt, the evidence must establish a ‘willful act or omission calculated to embarrass or hinder the court or obstruct the administration of justice.’ ”) (quoting Forbes v. State, 933 So. 2d 706, 71…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Forbes v. State, 933 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)