COUNTY OF DADE, STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
NORMAN F. HAFT, RESPONDENT
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.
This case reviews an order taxing costs against Dade County after a criminal contempt conviction was reversed. The court held that a criminal contempt conviction is a crime, and thus costs can be assessed against the county upon reversal under Florida law.
Yes, Florida law authorizes the assessment of costs against a county when a criminal contempt conviction is reversed on appeal, as a criminal contempt conviction is considered a crime.
“We hold that Article XVI, § 9, of the Florida Constitution F.S.A. and § 939.15, Fla.Stat. (1967), F.S.A. authorize the assessment of costs in this situation.”
Establishes the legal basis for assessing costs.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNorman Haft was convicted of criminal contempt by the Metropolitan Court of Dade County. The circuit court reversed this conviction. Haft then sought …
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 Constitutional Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
A petition for certiorari by Dade County seeks review of a circuit court order directing the Metropolitan Court of Dade County to tax costs for the respondent.
In March 1965 Haft had been convicted of criminal contempt by a judge of the Metropolitan Court of Dade County. The circuit court reversed this conviction in August 1965. Haft filed a motion to tax costs with the clerk of the Metropolitan Court in September 1965. The motion was denied in March 1967. Haft appealed to the circuit court, which ruled in his favor and entered the order taxing costs in March 1968. Dade County then filed the petition presently before us.
The petitioner urges that there is no statutory or other legal authority for the assessment of costs against it upon an appeal from the Metropolitan Court. We hold that Article XVI, § 9, of the Florida Constitution F.S.A. and § 939.15, Fla.Stat. (1967), F.S.A. authorize the assessment of costs in this situation. Respondent has urged that the statute grants authority for the assessment of costs upon reversal by the circuit court of any conviction in the Metropolitan Court of Dade County for violation of an ordinance. We expressly decline to so hold; such a holding would range beyond the issue presented in this case. We do hold that a conviction for criminal contempt is a conviction of a crime and is therefore within the purview of the statute. See Bloom v. State, 391 U.S. 194, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 L.Ed.2d 522 (U.S. May 20, 1968).
Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cnty. OF Dade v. Sansom, 226 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…Dade County, in this situation. Sansom next argues that the taxation of costs is permissible under the authority of County of Dade, State of Florida v. Culver, Fla.App.1968, 215 So. 2d 895 and County of Dade, State of Florida v. Haft, Fla.App.1968, 212 So. 2d 50. The Culver opinion authorized the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit to review the excessiveness of a sentence for conviction of a misdemeanor imposed by the Metropolitan Court of Dade County, Florida. It relied on Section 932.-52(15)…
Authorities Cited
- Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194 (U.S. 1968)