From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Butter

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 1, 1989
546 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Opinion

No. 89-754.

August 1, 1989.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Dade County, Appellate Division; Margarita Esquiroz, Philip Bloom, and Arthur L. Rothenberg, Judges.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Fariba N. Komeily, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Young, Stern Tannenbaum, P.A., and Burton Young, North Miami Beach, for respondent.

Before BASKIN, JORGENSON and COPE, JJ.


Because intent is an essential element of the crime of contempt, Florida Ventilated Awning Co. v. Dickson, 67 So.2d 218 (Fla. 1953); Dudley v. State, 511 So.2d 1052 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Thomson v. State, 398 So.2d 514 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), the circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of the law in reversing the judgment and sentence of contempt. Therefore, we deny the state's petition for writ of common law certiorari.

Petition denied.

BASKIN and JORGENSON, JJ., concur.


I would grant the petition under authority of Aron v. Huttoe, 258 So.2d 272 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. discharged, 265 So.2d 699 (Fla. 1972), but on this record would mitigate the penalty to a monetary sanction only. See Studnick v. State, 341 So.2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 348 So.2d 954 (Fla. 1977).


Summaries of

State v. Butter

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 1, 1989
546 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)
Case details for

State v. Butter

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, v. STEPHEN H. BUTTER, RESPONDENT

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 1, 1989

Citations

546 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Citing Cases

Riggs v. State

When circumstances alone are used as the basis for contempt, and where the intent of the defendant is unclear…