RULE 3.830 | DIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
Committee Notes
Much of the terminology of the proposal is patterned after Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42(a) with variations for purposes of clarity. What may be considered a significant change from the terminology of the federal rule is that the proposal provides for a “judgment” of contempt, whereas the term “order” of contempt is used in the federal rule. Both terms have been used in Florida appellate cases. The term “judgment” is preferred here since it is consistent with the procedure of adjudicating guilt and is more easily reconciled with a “conviction” of contempt, common terminology on the trial and appellate levels in Florida. It also is consistent with appeals in contempt cases. See, e.g., State ex rel. Shotkin v. Buchanan, 149 So.2d 574, 98 A.L.R.2d 683 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963), for the use of the term “judgment”.
1972 Amendment. Same as prior rule.
You might need to reference it during your pursuit of justice.
For instance, you might need to invoke certain rules to protect yourself from judges/lawyers who break the law (see this example of a Florida judge who outright committed perjury).
As always, please get the justice you deserve.
Sincerely,
www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
