¶ 28 Thus, in Utah, the statutory requirement of an affidavit is a procedural prerequisite to the imposition of any sanctions for indirect contempt. See Thomas, 759 P.2d at 1171;see also Khan v. Khan, 921 P.2d 466, 468 (Utah Ct.App. 1996); Boggs v. Boggs, 824 P.2d 478, 481-82 (Utah Ct.App. 1991). Crank never submitted an affidavit, nor have the parties specifically addressed the issue of whether Crank's verified motion — which did include specific allegations against Judge Anderson — could be treated as an affidavit for purposes of Section 78-32-3. In another context, we have held that "[a] verified pleading, made under oath and meeting the requirements for affidavits established in Rule 56(e) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, can be the equivalent of an affidavit for purposes of a motion for summary judgment."
A criminal contempt order is separate from the ongoing proceedings and is appealable as a matter of right. See Boggs v. Boggs, 824 P.2d 478, 480–81 (Utah Ct.App.1991) (“A judgment of criminal contempt is generally considered to be a final order separate from ongoing proceedings and appealable as a matter of right.”). Accordingly, the juvenile court advised Mother and her counsel at the hearing that any appeal must be filed within thirty days of the entry of the contempt order.
A criminal contempt order is separate from the ongoing proceedings and is appealable as a matter of right. See Boggs v. Boggs, 824 P.2d 478, 480-81 (Utah Ct. App. 1991) ("A judgment of criminal contempt is generally considered to be a final order separate from ongoing proceedings and appealable as a matter of right."). Accordingly, the juvenile court advised Mother and her counsel at the hearing that any appeal must be filed within thirty days of the entry of the contempt order.
However, the one-sentence request that Appellant be found in contempt, which appeared at the end of Appellee's six-page motion for damages, seems to be an afterthought that "[a]t most . . . provided notice that Wife might request the trial judge to authorize and issue an order to show cause." Boggs v. Boggs, 824 P.2d 478, 481 (Utah Ct. App. 1991). In no meaningful sense is a single unsworn sentence the equivalent of a detailed affidavit.
State v. Long, 844 P.2d 381, 384 (Utah App. 1992). If no such affidavit is presented to the court, indirect contempt cannot be found. See Boggs v. Boggs, 824 P.2d 478, 481-82 (Utah App. 1991) (reversing indirect contempt determination against husband, for his failure to respond to wife's discovery requests, where no charging affidavit was submitted to court). The requirement of an affidavit helps to ensure compliance with the Due Process requirement of adequate and timely notice of the charges made against the alleged contemnor.