McRoy v. State
| Decision Date | 26 March 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. 5D09-1571.,5D09-1571. |
| Citation | 31 So.3d 273 |
| Parties | Michelle McROY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert Wesley, Public Defender, and Rosemarie Farrell, Assistant Public Defender, Orlando, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Anthony J. Golden, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
While attending a juvenile court proceeding, Michelle McRoy's cell phone rang, drawing the attention of the presiding judge. Ms. McRoy was asked by the court why her phone was not turned off as the court instructed at the commencement of the proceedings. Ms. McRoy explained that she had turned her phone off as directed. However, while in court, she loaned the phone to her sister who went outside to make a call and returned the phone to her without turning it off. Ms. McRoy admitted that she did not check whether the phone was off when her sister returned the phone. Apparently viewing this conduct as contumacious, the trial court found Ms. McRoy in direct criminal contempt, forfeited the cell phone, and ordered the Orange County Sheriff's Department to destroy it. Ms. McRoy appeals and we reverse.
Contempt is an act tending to embarrass, hinder, or obstruct the court in the administration of justice, or to lessen the court's authority or dignity. Richey v. McLeod, 137 Fla. 281, 188 So. 228, 229 (1939). Contempt does not exist just because a judge feels aggrieved or vexed. Via v. State, 633 So.2d 1198, 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Direct criminal contempt is summary punishment for conduct that occurs in the presence of the court. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.830. Direct criminal contempt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Braisted v. State, 614 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); see Hicks ex rel. Feiock v. Feiock, 485 U.S. 624, 632, 108 S.Ct. 1423, 99 L.Ed.2d 721 (1988).
Rule 3.830 requires that the judgment of guilt of contempt include a recital of those facts underlying the charged contempt upon which the adjudication of guilt is based. This requirement cannot be dismissed as merely a technical requirement. Gidden v. State, 613 So.2d 457, 460 (Fla.1993). Purely conclusory statements will not meet the requirement of a recitation of facts. For example, citing the contemnor's "unjudicious, unethical and intemperate conduct before the court" is insufficient. See Ray v. State, 352 So.2d 110, 111-12 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). Here, neither the written order nor the oral pronouncement of the court recited evidentiary facts supporting the finding of contempt. In its entirety, the substantive portion of the contempt order provides: The trial court's oral statements at the contempt proceeding were equally lacking in specificity. This alone would require reversal for the entry of a proper order.
Even if the order was facially sufficient, we would reverse the conviction of direct criminal contempt as there is no evidence beyond a reasonable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michaels v. Loftus
...redirect examination. The law requires a charge of direct criminal contempt be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. McRoy v. State, 31 So.3d 273, 274 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). We review such orders on an abuse of discretion standard. Rudolph v. State, 832 So.2d 826, 828 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Michaels......
-
Michaels v. Loftus
...redirect examination. The law requires a charge of direct criminal contempt be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. McRoy v. State, 31 So. 3d 273, 274 (Fla. 5thPage 7DCA 2010). We review such orders on an abuse of discretion standard. Rudolph v. State, 832 So. 2d 826, 828 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); M......
-
Maas v. HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n
...with or impugns the judicial function, not whether it causes a particular judge to feel aggrieved or vexed."); McRoy v. State , 31 So. 3d 273, 274, 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (reversing order of direct criminal contempt where "there [wa]s no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. McRoy's ......
-
M.J. v. State
...a defendant for direct criminal contempt if the conduct at issue was actually committed in the presence of the court. McRoy v. State, 31 So.3d 273, 274 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). “The purpose of criminal contempt is ‘to punish assaults or aspersions upon the authority and dignity of a court or ju......
-
Enforcement of orders and judgments
...of transcript, it is impossible to determine if lower court made sufficient findings to comply with rule).] CASES • Mcroy v. State , 31 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). Trial court erred in holding defendant in direct criminal contempt for failing to turn her cell phone off and allowing it t......
-
Crimes
...cell phone confiscated and destroyed as punishment for contempt for allowing the phone to ring during court proceedings. McRoy v. State, 31 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (See Wiggs v. State , 981 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) for reversal of a direct criminal contempt adjudication of an a......