Krathen v. State, 73--1325
| Decision Date | 27 March 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 73--1325,73--1325 |
| Citation | 310 So.2d 381 |
| Parties | David KRATHEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Ray Sandstrom of Sandstrom & Hodge, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Stephen R. Koons, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Appellant, an assistant public defender, was held in contempt of court for conduct occurring in the course of the trial of a criminal case. On appeal from the order of contempt appellant contends that (1) substantively, his conduct was not contemptuous, and (2) procedurally, the court denied him due process under Rule 3.830 RCrP. In our judgment appellant is correct on both points.
Appellant had been appointed counsel for one Shirley Jean Hall who, along with one Elizabeth Swinton, had been jointly informed against for robbery. Appellant had filed a motion on behalf of his client for severance which motion was Denied. A week before trial the co-defendant, Elizabeth Swinton, changed her plea from not guilty to nolo contendere. Although she was thereafter named as a prosecution witness against Shirley Jean Hall, the State did not call her at trial. Shirley Jean Hall, testifying in her own behalf, stated in essence that she had gone into the store only for the purpose of shoplifting and that the robbery was committed by her companion, Elizabeth Swinton, acting solely on her own.
In his final summation appellant referred to the presence of the victim in the courtroom, to which comment the court sustained the State's objection. Appellant then commented on the failure of the State to call Elizabeth Swinton to the stand As a prosecution witness. 1 At that point the following colloquy occurred between Mr. Smith (the prosecutor), appellant and the court:
Within an hour or so after the mistrial had been declared and the jury discharged, appellant sought to inquire of the court the basis upon which the contempt order had been based and to request a hearing under Rule 3.830 RCrP and to have a supersedeas bond set in the event the order was not vacated. Ruling on the request in inverse order, the judge denied a supersedeas bond, denied appellant a hearing, and recited the events at trial as the basis of the finding of contempt.
Contempt of court has been variously defined as 'an offense against the authority or the dignity of a court or of a judicial officer when acting judicially', Ex Parte Earman, 1923, 85 Fla. 297, 95 So. 755, 760, 31 ALR 1226, or, 'any act which is calculated to embarrass, hinder or obstruct the court in the administration of justice, or which is calculated to lessen its authority or its dignity', Ex parte Crews, 1937, 127 Fla. 381, 173 So. 275, 279, or, conduct 'such as tends to bring the administration of the law into disrespect and disregard' or which 'interferes with or prejudices parties litigant or their witnesses during litigation', 6 Fla.Jur., Contempt, § 2, or, as 'disobedience to the Court, an opposing or a despising of the authority, justice or dignity thereof', South Dade Farms, Inc. v. Peters, Fla.195...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weinstein, In re
...South Dade Farms, Inc. v. Peters, 88 So.2d 891 (Fla.1956) (quoting Oswald, Contempt of Court, page 5). See also Krathen v. State, 310 So.2d 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Kleinfeld v. State, 270 So.2d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972), cert. denied, 275 So.2d 251 (Fla.1973). In Kleinfeld, a contempt judgment......
-
McDonald v. State
...Fla.App.1970, 234 So.2d 16; Berman v. State, Fla.App.1971, 253 So.2d 144; Speller v. State, Fla.App.1974, 305 So.2d 231; Krathen v. State, Fla.App.1975, 310 So.2d 381; cf. Miller v. State, Fla.App.1975, 305 So.2d 826. Moreover, we hold that the trial court erred in finding appellant guilty ......
-
State ex rel. Garlovsky v. Eastmoore, 79-289
...be the basis for a contempt order. The definition of contempt of court has been succinctly set forth in the case of Krathen v. State, 310 So.2d 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975): Contempt of court has been variously defined as "an offense against the authority or the dignity of a court or of a judici......
-
Wells v. State, 84-1616
...court's twenty-minute limit on his closing argument does not constitute contempt of court as that phrase is defined in Krathen v. State, 310 So.2d 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). This court quoted Krathen's definition with approval in State ex rel. Garlovsky v. Eastmoore, 393 So.2d 567 (Fla. 5th D......