FOURTH D I VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, RA Y and M CM I LLI A N, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

M ar ch 10, 2016



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 5 A2 02 9 . LEW IS v . CITY OF SAVANNAH.

B A R N E S , Pres i d i n g J ud g e.

Th e Reco rd er’ s Co u rt o f Ch at h am Co u n t y en t ered an o rd er fi n d i n g t h at Is aac

Lewi s h ad v i o lat ed a 2 0 1 0 ceas e an d d es i s t o rd er ( t h e “ 2 0 1 0 Ord er”) an d s ev eral

m u ni ci p al o rd i n an ces b y o perat i n g il l eg al ro o m i n g h o u s es i n Sav an n ah

. Th e

reco rd er’ s co u rt fi n ed Lewi s fo r t h e v i o lat i on s (i n cl u d i n g a $ 1 ,0 00 fi ne fo r vi o l at i n g

t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er) an d sen ten ced h i m t o s ev eral m on t h s o f i n carcerat i o n i n t h e co u n t y

d et en t i o n cen t er. L e wi s f i l e d a p et i t io n fo r a wri t o f cert i o rari to th e su p eri o r co u rt

,

arg u i n g t hat t h e reco rd er’ s co urt erred b y h o l d i n g h i m i n co n t em p t o f t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er,

wh i ch h ad b een en t ered in an u n rel a t ed cas e t h at had b een di s m i s s ed

. Lewi s al s o

arg u ed t hat t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt erred i n s an ct i o n i n g h im fo r v i o l at i n g t h e m u n i ci p al

o rd i n an ces b ecau se h e was n o t p ro v i d ed a reas o n ab le o pp o rt u n i t y t o co rrect t h e

d efi ci en ci es i n t h e p ro p ert i es b efo re t h e en fo rcem en t act i o n was co m m en ced ag ai n s th i m

. Th e s u p eri o r co urt affi rm ed t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt

, an d Lewi s t h en fi l ed an

ap p li cat io n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal , wh i ch t h i s Co u rt g ran t ed

.

Fo r t h e reas o n s d i s cu s s ed b el o w, we co n cl u d e t hat t he reco rd er’ s co u rt l ack ed

ju ri s d i ct i o n t o h o ld Lewi s i n co n t em p t o f t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord e r

. We t h erefo re rev ers e t h e

s u p eri o r co u rt to t h e ex t en t th at i t u p h el d t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt d eci s i on ho l d i n g Lewi s

i n co n t em p t o f t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er an d fi n i n g h i m $ 1

, 0 00 fo r t h at v i o l at io n

. In ad d i t i o n,

b ecau s e i t i s un cl ear fro m t he reco rd t o wh at ex ten t t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt rel i ed u p o n

i t s fi nd i n g t h at Lewi s was i n co n t em pt o f t h e 2 0 1 0 O r d er i n s en t en ci n g Lewi s to

s ev eral m o n t h s o f i n carcerat i on

, we vacat e t h e s u p eri o r co urt ’ s affi rm an ce o f Lewi s ’ s

s en t en ce an d rem an d s o t hat Lewi s can b e res en t e n ced in t he reco rd er’ s co u rt

co n si s t en t wi t h t h i s o p i ni on . W e affi rm t h e s u p eri o r co u rt i n al l o t h er res p ect s

.

Th e 2 0 1 0 Cea s e an d Des i s t Or d er

. Th e reco rd refl ect s t hat Lewi s has o p erat ed

ro o m i n g ho u s es 1 fo r ten an t s i n t h e Ci t y o f Sav an n ah (t h e “ Ci t y ”) s i n ce t h e 1 9 9 0 s an d

h as recei v ed rep eat ed n o t i c es fro m Ci t y i n s p ect o rs co n cern i n g zo n in g o rd i n an ce

v i o l at i o n s an d o t h er p ro bl em s wi t h hi s op erat i o n o f t h e h o u s es

. In Oct o b er 2 0 1 0

, t h e

1 Sect i o n 8 -3 00 2 o f th e Ci t y o f Sav an n ah ’ s Co d e o f Ord i n an ces (t h e “ Sav an n ah

Co d e”) d efi n es a ro om i n g h ou s e “ as “ [a] d wel l i n g i n wh ich m eal s o r l o d g i n g o r b o th

are fu rn i s h ed fo r co m

p en s at io n t o m o r e t h a n t wo an d l es s t h an t en n o n t ran s i en t

p ers o n s .”

2Ci t y b ro ug h t a co d e en fo rcem en t a c t io n ag ai n s t L ewi s i n t h e Reco rd er’ s Co u rt o f

Ch at ham C o u n t y f

o r h i s i l leg al o perat i o n of a ro o m i n g h o u s e l o cat ed at 2 5 1 4

W h i t ak er St reet

. Th at s am e m o nt h

, th e reco rd er’ s co u rt en tered th e 2 0 1 0 Ord er, wh i ch

req u i red Lewi s t o co rrect cert ai n d e f i c i en ci es at 2 51 4 W h i t ak er St reet

, o b t ai n a

cert ifi cat e o f o ccu pan cy an d o t her req u i red p erm i t s

, p ay res t i t u t i o n t o t h e t en an t s

, an d

p ay a $ 1,0 0 0 fi n e fo r h i s v i o l at i o n s o f t h e Sav an n ah Co d e. Parag rap h 7 o f t h e 2 0 1 0

Ord er fu rt h er pro vi d ed th at Lewi s “ s h al l ceas e an d d es i s t f r o m an y act i v i t i es t h at

v i o l at e t h e Co d e o f th e Ci t y o f Sav an n ah ,” an d “ s h al l n o t m an ag e, l eas e, ren t o r res i d e

i n an y ad d i t i o nal il leg al ro o m i n g h ou s e w i t hi n Ch at h am Co u n t y. ” T h e 2 01 0 Ord er

a l s o s t at ed t h at fai l u re t o co m p l y wi t h i t s p ro v i s i o n s “ m ay res u l t in a fi n e o f u p t o

$ 1 ,0 0 0 an d / o r u p t o 3 0 d ay s i n jai l .”

Lewi s was ord ered to rep o rt b ack t o reco rd er’ s co urt i n No vem b er 2 0 1 0

. Aft er

co n du ct in g a h eari n g i n wh i ch a Ci t y i n sp ect o r pro v i ded a s t at u s u p d at e reg ard i n g t h e

ro o m i n g h o u s e at i s s u e, t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt j u d ge d i s m is sed t h e cas e, as refl ect ed by

a h an dwri t t en n o t at io n o f “ Di sm i s s ed ” o n a p ri n t o u t o f t h e d ock et t h at was s i g n ed by

t h e ju d g e an d t h en en t ered i n th e reco rd er’ s co u rt reco rd s

. Ac c o r d i n g to Lewi s

, h e

l at er wen t t o t h e c l erk ’ s o ffi ce o f t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt an d so u gh t to p ay t h e fi n e

3i m

p o s ed o n h i m b y t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er, b u t t h e cl erk t o l d h i m t h at “ t here [was ] n o fi ne”

b ecau s e t h e cas e h ad b een d i s m i s s ed

.

Th e Co n s ol i d

a t ed 2 0 1 3 E

n f o r cemen t Act i o ns

. Fo l l o w i n g i n s p ect i on s i n 2 0 1 3,

t h e Ci t y b ro u g h t a seri es o f n ew co d e en fo rcem en t act i o n s ag ai ns t Lewi s i n reco rd er’ s

co u rt fo r v io l at i ng t he Sav an n ah Co d e i n h is o perat i o n o f ro om i n g h o u s es at 2 0 o t h er

p ro p ert i es

. No n e of t h e s e e n f o rcem en t act i o n s were fo r t h e ho u s e l o cat ed at 2 5 1 4

W h i t ak er St reet

, t h e s u b

ject o f t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er.

Bas ed on t h e al l eg ed Sav an n ah Co d e v i o l at io n s i n t h e 2 0 p ro pert i es , t h e Ci t y

s o u g ht fi n es an d pen al t i es fro m Lewi s an d req u es t ed t h at h e b e i n carcerat ed fo r 1 7

m o nt h s

. Th e Ci ty al s o arg u ed t h at Lewi s was i n v io l at i o n of t he 2 0 1 0 Ord er fro m t h e

u n rel at ed cas e b ecau s e h e n ev er p ai d t h e $ 1 ,0 0 0 fi n e an d b e c a u s e h i s o p erat i o n o f

i l leg al ro o m in g h o us es o n t h e 2 0 p ro p ert ie s c o nt rav en ed Parag rap h 7 o f t h e 2 0 1 0

Ord er. Th e Ci ty req u es t ed t h at Lewi s b e f i n e d a n ad d i t i o nal $ 1

, 0 0 0 fo r fai l i n g to

co m p l y wi t h t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er.

Th e 2 01 3 en fo rcem en t act i o n s ag ai n s t Lewi s w e re co n so l i d at ed i n to a s i n g l e

cas e t h at was h eard b y th e s am e reco rd er’ s co u rt j u d ge wh o h ad d i s m i s s ed t he Ci t y ’ s

2 0 1 0 cas e ag ai n s t Lewi s

. A t hree-d ay ev i den ti ary h eari n g en su ed i n w hi ch t h e St at e

p res en t ed t h e t es t i m o n y o f v ari o u s Ci t y i n s pect o rs an d o t h er wi t n es s es t o t h e

4d efi ci en ci es i n t h e 2 0 p ro p ert i es

. Lewi s al s o t es ti f i ed an d cal l ed s ev eral d efen s e

wi t n es s es o n h i s b eh al f.

Du ri n g t h e th ree-d a y h e a r i n g

, Lewi s m o v ed t o d i s m i s s th e co n s o l i d at ed

en fo rcem en t act i o n s, arg u i n g

, am o n g o t h er t h in g s, t hat t h e 2 01 0 Ord er co u l d n o t b e

en fo rced ag ai n s t h i m i n t h e cu rren t p ro ceed i n g s b ecau s e t h e u n rel at ed 2 01 0 cas e h ad

b een d i s m i s sed

. Th e t ri al co u rt v erb al l y d en ied t h e m o t i o n

, fi n d i n g t h at wh i l e t h e

2 0 1 0 cas e “ was di sm i s s ed ,” t he 2 0 1 0 Ord er n ev ert h el es s “ r e m a i n [ed ] i n t act ” an d

co u ld b e en fo rced ag ai n s t Lewi s

. Th e reco r d e r ’s c o u rt l at er en t ered a w ri t t en o rd er

d en y i n g Lewi s ’ m o ti o n t o d i sm i s s

.

Fo l l owi n g t h e h eari n g

, t h e r e c o rd er’ s co u rt en t ered a d et ai l ed fi n al o rd er,

fi nd i n g t h a t Lewi s ’ o p erat io n o f t h e ro o m i n g ho u s es o n t h e 20 p ro p ert i es was in

v i o l at i o n o f m

u l t i pl e p ro v i s i o n s o f t h e Sav an n ah Co d e, as t h e Ci t y h ad al l eg ed

. Th e

reco rd er’ s co u rt al s o fo u n d th at Lewi s was i n v i o l at i o n o f t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er. Bas ed o n

t h es e fi n d i n g s

, th e reco r d er’ s co u rt o rd ered L ewi s t o p ay $ 7 3

, 0 5 0 i n fi n es an d

p en al t i es (wh i ch i n cl u d ed “ a $ 1 ,0 0 0 .0 0 fi n e as req u i red b y t h e [2 0 1 0 Ord er] ”) an d

s en t en ced h i m

t o s erv e ei g h t -an d -o n e-h al f m o n t h s i n t h e co u n ty d et en t i on cen t er.

Lewi s ap p eal ed t h e d eci si o n o f t h e reco rd er’ s co urt b y fi l i n g a p e t i t i o n f o r a

wri t of cert i o rari t o t h e Su p er i o r Co u rt o f Ch at h am Co u nt y

. See S mi th v. Gwi n n et t

5Co u n t

y

, 2 4 6 Ga. Ap p

. 8 6 5

, 8 6 7 (1 ) (b ) (5 4 2 SE2 d 6 1 6 ) (2 0 00 ) (p ro p er p ro ced u re fo r

a p p e a l i n g t h e d eci si o n o f a reco rd er’ s co urt i s b y fi l i n g a p et i t i o n fo r a wri t o f

cert io rari t o t h e s u p eri o r co u rt ). See al s o OCGA §§ 5 -4 -1 (a); 1 5 -6 -8 (4 ) (B), (C). He

arg u ed t h at t he reco rd er’ s co u rt erred b y fi nd i n g h i m i n co nt em p t o f th e 2 0 1 0 Ord er

b ecau s e t h e 2 0 1 0 cas e h ad b een d i s m i s s ed

. Lewi s fu rt h er arg u ed t hat t h e reco rd er’ s

co u rt erred b y

s an ct i on i n g h i m f

o r v i o l at i n g t h e Sav an n ah Co d e i n h i s o p erat i o n o f

t h e 2 0 p ro p ert i es b ecau s e t h e Ci t y h ad fai l ed t o p ro v i d e h i m wi t h a reas o n ab l e

o p p o rt u ni t y t o co rrect t h e d efi ci en ci es i n t h e pro p ert i es b efo re fi l i ng s u i t ag ai n s t h i m

.

Th e s u p eri o r co u rt reject ed Lewi s ’ arg u m en ts an d affi rm ed t h e d eci s i o n o f t h e

reco rd er’ s co u rt

. Lewi s fi l ed an ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap peal

, wh i ch th i s Co u rt

g ran t ed , res u l ti n g i n t h e p res en t ap p eal

.

1

. Lewi s co nt en d s t h at th e s u p eri or co u rt erred i n u p h ol d i n g t h e d eci s i o n o f t h e

reco rd er’ s co u rt fi n d i n g h i m i n co n t em p t o f t h e 2 0 1 0 O rd er. Lewi s arg u es t h at t h e

reco rd er’ s co urt co u l d n o t h o l d h i m i n co n t em p t o f an o rd er fro m a d i fferen t cas e t h at

h ad b een d is m i s s ed

. 2 W e ag ree.

2 Th e reco rd er’ s co u rt d i d n o t u s e t h e wo rd “ co n tem p t ” i n fi n d i n g t h at Lewi s

h ad v i ol at ed t he 2 0 1 0 Ord er, b u t “ o rd ers are co n st ru ed acco rd i n g t o t hei r s u b s t an ce

an d fu n ct i o n an d n ot m erel y b y n o m en cl a t u r e .” Fo r es t Ci t y G u n Cl u b v. Ch a t h a m

Co u n t y , 2 8 0 Ga. Ap p . 2 1 9 , 2 2 0 (6 3 3 SE2 d 6 2 3 ) (2 0 06 ).

6W h ere an ap p eal fro m reco rd er’ s co u rt co m es befo re t h e s u p eri o r co u rt o n wri t

o f cert i o rari p urs u an t t o O CGA § 5 -4 -3

, t he s up eri o r co u rt ’ s s co p e o f r e v i ew i s

l i m i ted t o a co n s i d erat i o n of “ erro rs o f l aw” an d w h e t h er “ t he ju d g m en t o r ru l i n g

b el o w was s u s tai n ed b y s u b s t an t i al ev i den ce.” OCGA § 5 -4 -1 2 (b ). W h et h er a co u rt

h as ju ri s d i ct i o n an d t h e au t h o ri t y t o en t er a co n t em p t fi n d i n g i s a l eg al q u es t i o n

, an d

we o we n o d eferen ce t o t h e ru l i n g o f t h e s u p eri o r co u rt o r reco rd er’ s co u rt o n t h i s

q u es ti o n an d i n s t ead “ co n d u ct a d e n o v o rev i ew o f t h e m at t er fo r p l ai n l eg al erro r.”

Mo n t g o m er y v. Mo r r i s , 3 2 2 Ga. Ap p. 5 58 , 5 59 (1 ) (7 4 5 SE2 d 7 78 ) (2 0 1 3).

Un d er Geo rg i a law, t h e u n q ual i fi ed d i s m i s s al o f a cas e t erm i n at es t h e act i o n,

d i v es t s t h e t ri al co u rt o f ju ri s d ict i o n t o t ak e fu rt her act i o n i n t he cas e, an d ren d ers al l

o rd ers en t ered aft er t he di s m is s al a m ere n u l l i t y

. See Mo n t g o mer y

, 32 2 Ga. Ap p

. at

5 6 0 (1 ); Ga l l a g h er v. F

i d e r i o n Gr o u

p

, LLC

, 3 0 0 Ga. Ap p

. 4 3 4

, 4 3 6 (1 ) (6 8 5 SE2 d

3 8 7 ) ( 2 0 0 9); Co t t o n v. Su r r en cy

, 2 7 7 Ga. Ap p

. 1 5 8 (6 2 6 SE2 d 1 4 8 ) (2 0 0 6 ).

Fu rt h erm o re, u p o n di s m is s al o f t h e cas e, al l p ri o r o rd ers t h at were en t ered in t h e cas e

are s up erced ed an d can n o l o n ger be en fo rced ag ai n s t t h e p art i es

. See Mo n t g o mer y

,

3 2 2 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 60 (1 ); Ga ll a gh er

, 3 0 0 Ga. Ap p. at 4 36 (1 ). Th us

, t h e d i s m i s s al o f

a cas e di v es t s t h e co u rt o f ju ri s di ct i o n t o co n s id er a s u b s eq u en t co n t em p t m o t i o n an d

p recl u d es t h e co u rt fro m

fi n d i ng a p art y

i n co n t em

pt o f an o rd er p rev i o us l y

en t ered

7i n th at cas e. See M o n t g o m er y

, 3 2 2 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 60 -5 6 1 (1 ); Ga ll a g her

, 3 00 Ga. Ap p.

at 4 36 -4 3 7 (1 ). See al s o Kn a p p v. Cr o s s

, 2 7 9 Ga. Ap p

. 6 3 2

, 6 37 (3 ) (6 3 2 SE2 d 1 5 7 )

(2 0 0 6) (h o l d i n g t hat p art y co u ld no t b e h el d i n co nt em p t f o r v io lat i ng an o rd er t h at

was n o l o n ger i n effect ).

Ap p ly i n g t h es e p ri n ci p l es t o t h e p res en t cas e, w e n ot e t h a t a t t he ev i d en ti ary

h eari n g b efo re th e reco rd er’ s co u rt i n t h e 2 0 1 3 en fo rcem en t act i o n

, Lewi s t e s t i fi ed

t h at t h e u n rel a t e d 2 0 1 0 cas e h ad been d i s m is sed i n No v em b er 2 0 1 0

, an d h e

i n t ro du ced i nt o ev i d en ce t h e p ri n t o u t o f t h e d o ck et s h eet fro m th e cas e sh o w i n g t h e

n o t at i o n “ Di sm i ss ed ” t hat h ad b een s i g n ed b y t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt ju dg e an d en t ered

i n t h e reco rd er’ s co urt reco rd s. Lewi s fu rt h er t es t i fi ed t hat wh en h e l at er wen t t o t h e

cl erk ’ s offi ce o f th e reco rd er’ s co u rt an d s o u g h t t o p ay t h e fi n e i m p o sed o n h i m b y t h e

2 0 1 0 O rd er, t h e cl erk t o ld h i m t h at th e cas e h ad been di s m i s s ed an d t hat t h e fi n e n o

l o n g er n eed ed to b e p ai d

. Th e Ci t y d i d n o t i n t ro d u ce an y t es t i m o n y o r d o cu m en t ary

ev i d en ce co n t rad i ct i n g Lewi s ’ s cl ai m t hat t he 2 0 1 0 cas e h ad been d i s m i s s ed

, an d t h e

reco rd er’ s co u rt ju d g e (wh o was t h e s am e ju d g e wh o h ad w ri t t en t h e “ Di s m i s s al ”

n o t at i o n o n t h e 20 1 0 d o ck et s h eet ) fo u n d at t h e co n cl u s i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g t h at t h e

2 0 1 0 cas e “ was d i s m i s s ed .”

8Un d er th es e ci rcu m st an ces

, wh ere t h e un co n t ro v ert ed ev i d en ce s h o ws t h at t h e

2 0 1 0 cas e ag ai n s t L ewi s h ad b een d i s m i s sed

, t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt was d i ves t ed o f

ju ri s d i ct i o n t o co n s i d er th e co n t em p t m o ti o n as p art o f th e 2 0 13 en fo rcem en t act i o n

an d l ack ed au t h o ri t y t o en fo rce t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er, wh i ch w a s n o l o n g er i n effect

. See

Mo n t g o m er y

, 3 2 2 Ga. A pp

. at 5 6 0 -5 6 1 (1 ); Ga l l ag h er

, 30 0 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 3 6 -4 3 7 (1 );

Kn a p p

, 27 9 Ga. A p p. at 63 7 (3 ). Co n s eq u en t l y

, t h e su p eri o r co u rt erred in u ph o l d i n g

t h e d eci s i o n o f t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt fi nd i n g Lewi s i n co n t em p t o f t h e 2 0 1 0 Ord er.

In arg ui n g fo r a d i fferen t res u l t , t he Ci t y em ph as izes t h at t h e d is m i s s ed 2 0 1 0

cas e w as a co d e en fo rcem en t act i o n b ro ug h t ag ai n st Lewi s i n reco rd er’ s co u rt

, wh i ch

was a q u as i -cri m i n al p ro ceed i n g

. See D eKa l b Co un t y v. Ger a r d

, 20 7 Ga. Ap p

. 4 3 (1 )

(4 2 7 SE2 d 3 6 ) (1 9 9 3)

. W h i l e t h e cas es ci t ed s u p ra i n o u r o p i n io n ad d res sed t h e effect

o f an u nq u al i fi ed d i s m i s s al i n a ci v i l cas e on s u b s eq u en t co n t em p t p ro ceed i n g s , t h e

Ci t y ci t es t o n o p ers u as i v e l eg al au t h o ri t y

, an d we h av e fo u n d no n e, t h at wo u l d ju s t i fy

t reat i n g th e effect of a d i s m i ss al i n a q u as i -cri m i n al cas e d ifferen t l y o r l es s s t ri n g en t l y

t h an a d i sm i s s al i n a ci v il cas e. 3 In d eed , i f an o rd er en t ered i n a q u as i -cri m i n al cas e

3 Th e Ci t y

ci t es t o OCGA § 1 6 -1 -4 , wh i ch p ro vi des :

No co nd u ct co n st i t u t es a cri m e u n l e s s it i s d es cri b ed as a cri m e i n t h i s

t i tl e o r i n an o t h er s t at u te o f t h i s st at e. Ho wev er, t h i s Co d e s ect i o n d o es

n o t affect t h e p o wer o f a co u rt t o p u n i s h fo r co n t em p t o r t o em

p l o y an y

s an ct i o n au t ho ri zed b y l aw fo r t he en fo rcem en t o f an o rd er, ci v i l

9were t o be en fo rced ag ai n s t a p ers o n ev en t h o ug h t h e cas e h ad b een p re v i o u s l y

d i s m i s s ed

, i t wo u l d rai s e si g ni fi can t d u e p ro ces s co ncern s as t o wh et h er t h e p ers o n

h ad “ fai r warn i n g ” of t he o rd er’ s co n t i n u ed effect

. See Pi t t s v. S t a t e

, 29 3 Ga. 5 1 1

, 5 1 4

(1 ) (7 4 8 SE2 d 4 26 ) (2 01 3 ) (“ In t h e co n t ex t o f a law w h i ch cri m i n al i zes cert ai n

b eh av i o r, d u e p ro ces s req u ires t h at t h e l aw g i v e a p ers o n o f o rd i n ary i n t el l i g en ce fai r

warn i n g o f t h e s p e c i fi c co n d u ct wh i ch i s fo rb i d d en o r m an d at ed .”). Hen ce, in

co n si d eri n g t he effect of a di s m is s al o n su b s eq u en t co n t em p t p ro ceed i n gs

, we d i s cern

n o b as i s fo r t reat i n g t h e di sm i s s al o f a q u as i

- c r i m i n al cas e d i fferen t l y t h an t h e

d i s m i s s al o f a ci v i l cas e.

Th e Ci t y al so as s ert s i n t h e al t ern at iv e t h at t h e 2 0 1 0 cas e was ad m i n i s t rat i v el y

cl o s ed t o rem o v e t h e m at t er fro m t h e p en d i n g h eari n g d o ck et rat h er t h an d i s m i s s ed

.

Bu t t h e Ci t y

p res en t ed n o t es t i m o n y

o r d ocu m en t ary

ev i d en ce at t h e h eari n g b efo re

t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt t o s u pp o rt t h i s as s ert i o n

, t h e h an d w ri t t en n ot at i o n o f t h e

reco rd e r ’s c o u rt ju dg e o n t h e d o ck et s h eet s ai d “ Di sm i s s ed ” w i t ho u t an y l i m i t at i o n

o r fu rt h er q u al ifi cat i o n

, an d t h e ju d g e i n v ol v ed i n b o t h th e 2 0 1 0 cas e an d th e 2 0 1 3

ju d g m en t , o r d ecree.

Th is st at u t o ry p ro v is i o n cl earl y d o es n o t ad d res s t h e effect o f t h e di s m i s s al o f a cas e

o n s u b s eq u en t co n t em

pt p ro ceed i n g s

.

10cas es fo un d t h at t h e 2 0 1 0 cas e h ad b een “ di sm i s s ed .” Th e Ci t y ’ s as sert i o n t h erefo re

i s wi t h o u t m eri t

.

Fo r t h es e co m

b i n e d reas o n s, t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt erred by fi nd i ng Lewi s in

co n tem p t o f t h e 2 0 1 0 O rd er an d fi ni n g h i m $ 1,0 0 0 fo r t h at v i o l at i o n

, an d we t h erefo re

rev ers e th e s u p eri o r co u rt t o t h e ex t en t t h at i t u p h el d t h o se ru l i ng s b y t h e reco rd er’ s

co u rt

. F u r t h e r m o re, i t i s u n cl ear t o wh at ex t en t t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt rel i ed u p o n i t s

fi nd i ng of co n t em

p t wh en i t s e n t en ced Lewi s to ei g ht -an d -o ne-h al f m o n t h s o f

i n carcerat i on

. Fo r th at reas o n

, we al s o v acat e t he s u p eri o r co u rt ’ s affi rm an ce o f

Lewi s ’ s s en t en ce an d rem an d s o t h at Lewi s can b e res en t en ced i n t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt

co n si s t en t wi t h t h i s o p i ni on

.

2

. In t w o rel at ed en u m erat i o n s of erro r, Lewi s co n t en d s t h at t h e s u p eri o r co u rt

erred i n u p ho l d i ng t h e d eci s i on o f t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt s an ct i o n i n g h i m fo r vi o l at i n g

t h e Sav an n ah Co d e b ecau se t h e Ci t y n ev er g av e h i m a reas o n ab l e o p p o rt u n i t y to

co rrect t he co d e v i o l at i o ns at t h e 2 0 p ro p ert i es b ef o r e fi l i n g su i t ag ai n s t h i m

.

Acco rd in g t o L ewi s

, t h e Ci t y ’ s fai l u re t o pro v id e h i m wi t h a reas o n ab l e o p p o rt u n i t y

t o co rrect t h e d efi ci e n c i e s v i o l at ed O CGA § 3 6 -7 4 -2 3 (b ), an d t h ere was n o

e v i den t i ary b as is fo r t he su p eri o r co u rt o r reco rd er’ s co u rt t o fi n d t hat h e h a d

11co m

m i t t ed “ rep eat vi o l at i o n s ,” an ex cep t i o n t o th e afo res ai d s tat u t o ry req u irem en t

. 4

Lewi s fu rt h er arg u es th at t h e Ci t y ’ s fai l ure t o p ro v i d e hi m wi t h n o t i ce an d reas o n ab l e

o p p o rt u ni t y to co rrect th e d efi ci en ci es v i o l at ed h i s ri g h t t o d u e p ro ces s. W e d i s cern

n o b as is fo r rev ers al

.

(a) W e f i r s t ad d res s Lewi s ’ co n t en t i o n t hat h e was en ti t led t o a reas o n ab l e

o p p o rt u ni t y t o co rre c t t h e d efi ci en ci es i n t h e pro p ert i es u n d er O CGA § 3 6 -7 4 -2 3,

wh i ch p ro v i des i n rel ev an t p art :

(b ) Ex cep t as p ro v i d ed i n s ub s ect i o n s (c) an d (d ) o f t h i s Co d e s ect i o n

,

i f a v i ol at i o n o f an y co d e o r o rd i n an ce i s fo u n d

, t h e co d e en fo rcem en t

o ffi cer s hal l no t i fy t h e v i o l at o r an d gi v e h i m o r h er a reas o n ab l e t i m e t o

co rrect t h e v i o l at io n

. Sh o u l d t h e v i o l at i o n co n ti n u e b ey on d t h e t i m e

s p eci fi ed fo r co rrect i o n

, t h e co d e en fo rcem en t offi cer s h al l p ro ceed w i t h

en fo rcem en t t hro ug h t h e ap p ro p ri at e co urt o r s h al l p ro ce e d w i t h

en fo rcem en t t h ro u g h t h e ap p ro p ri at e co d e en fo rcem en t b o ard

. . . .

4 Lewi s al s o v ag u el y cl ai m s t h at “ Ci t y Ord i n an ces ” req u ired t h at h e b e affo rd ed

a reas on ab l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o co rrect t h e d efi ci en ci es i n t h e p ro p ert i es b efo re an

en fo rcem en t act i o n co ul d b e co m m en ced

. Becau s e Lewi s h a s f a i l e d t o p ro v i d e an y

ci t at i o n to s p eci fi c l eg al au t ho ri t y o r t o t h e reco rd t o s u pp o rt h i s cl ai m reg ard in g “ Ci t y

Ord in an ces ,” h i s cl ai m i s d eem ed ab an d o n ed an d w e wi l l n o t ad d res s i t

. See Co u rt o f

Ap p eal s Ru l e 2 5 (c) (2 ). See al s o In t h e In t er es t o f G. Q.

, 3 2 8 Ga. Ap p

. 6 9

, 7 7 (1 ) (c)

(7 6 1 SE2 d 4 90 ) (2 0 14 ) (co n cl ud i n g t h at cl ai m on ap p eal h ad b een ab an do n ed wh ere

ap p el l an t fai l ed “ t o s u p p o rt [h i s ] cl ai m wi t h a n y m ean in g fu l arg u m en t o r wi th

s t at u to ry o r leg al au t ho ri t y fo r [h i s ] co n t en ti o n ”) (ci t at i o n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

12(c) If a rep eat vi ol at i o n i s fo u n d

, t h e co d e en fo rcem en t o ffi cer s h al l

n o t i fy t h e v i o l at o r bu t i s n o t req u ired t o g i v e t h e v i o lat o r a reas o n ab l e

t i m e t o co rrect t h e v i o l at i o n

. . . .

(d ) If t h e co d e en fo rcem en t o ffi cer h as su b st an t i a l r e as o n t o b el i ev e a

v i o l at i o n p res en t s a s eri o u s t h reat t o t h e p ub l i c h eal t h

, s afet y

, an d

wel fare or i f t he vi o l at io n is i rrep arab l e o r i rrev ers i b l e i n n at u re, th e

co d e en fo rcem en t o ffi cer s h al l m ak e a reas o n ab l e ef f o rt t o n o t i fy th e

v i o l at o r an d m ay i m

m ed i at el y n o t i fy t h e en fo rcem en t b o ard an d req u es t

a h eari n g

.

Up h ol d i n g t h e reco rd er’ s co u rt

, t h e s u p eri o r co u rt co n cl u d ed t h at t h e Ci t y was

n o t r e q u i r ed t o g iv e Lewi s a reas o n ab l e o p p o rt u n i ty t o co rrect t h e Sav an n ah Co d e

v i o l at i o n s b efo re fi l i n g s ui t ag ai n s t h i m b ecau s e h e had co m m i t t ed “ rep eat vi o l at i o n s ”

u n d er OCGA § 3 6-7 4 -2 3 (c), a n d b ecau s e t h e Ci t y h ad a reas o n ab l e b el i e f t h a t t h e

v i o l at i o n s p o sed a s eri o u s t h reat t o p u b l i c h eal t h, s afet y

, an d wel fare u nd er OCGA

§ 3 6 -7 4 -2 3 (d ). On ap p eal

, L ewi s arg u es t h at th e s u p eri o r co urt erred i n co n cl u d i n g

t h at h e h ad co m

m i t t ed “ rep eat v i o l at i o ns ,” b u t d o es n o t ad d res s th e s u p eri o r co urt ’ s

al t ern at i v e c o n c l u s i o n th at t h e v i o l at i o n s p o s ed a s eri o us t h reat t o p ub l ic h eal t h,

s afet y , an d wel fare.

Becau s e L ewi s p ro v id es n o ci tat i on s to t h e reco rd o r leg al arg u m en t as t o wh y

t h e s u p eri o r co urt erred i n co n cl u di n g t h at t h e Sav an n ah Co d e v i o l at i o n s p o s ed a

13s e r i o u s t h reat t o p u b l i c heal t h

, s afet y

, an d wel fare, an y arg u m en t i n t h at reg ar d h a s

b een ab an d o n ed fo r p u rp o s es o f ap p eal

. See Co u rt o f Ap p eal s R u l e 2 5 ( c ) (2 ).

Acco rd in g ly

, reg ard l es s o f wh et h er t h e s u p eri o r co u r t e r red i n fi n d i n g t h at Lewi s

co m m i t t ed “ rep eat v i o l at i o n s

, ”t h e s u p eri o r co u rt ’ s fi n d i n g th at th e Ci t y d i d n o t h av e

t o affo rd Lewi s wi t h a p re-s u it o p p o rt u n i ty t o co rrect t h e d efi ci en ci es u n der OCGA

§ 3 6-7 4-2 3 (b ) s t an d s affi rm ed o n t h e al t ern at i v e g ro un d t hat t h e v i o l at i o n s p o s ed a

s eri ou s t h reat t o p ub l i c h eal t h, s afet y

, an d w el fare. See Ra y v. Ha r t wel l R. Co

. , 2 8 9

Ga. 45 2

, 4 5 2 -4 5 3 (7 1 1 SE2 d 72 2 ) (2 0 1 1 ); La b MD v. Ad mi ra l In s

. Co

. , 3 23 Ga. Ap p.

9 0 6 , 9 0 8 -9 0 9 (2 ) (7 4 9 SE2 d 1 1 ) (2 0 1 3 ).

(b ) W e n ex t ad d res s Lewi s ’ s co nt en t i o n t h at h e was d ep ri ved of d ue p ro ces s

b eca u s e th e Ci t y fai led t o pro v i d e h i m wi t h n o ti ce an d a reas o n ab l e op p ort u n i ty to

co rrect t h e d efi ci en ci es in t h e p ro p ert i es

.

Th e co n s t i t u t i on al l y -g u aran t eed ri g h t t o d u e p ro ces s o f l aw i s

, at i t s

co re, t h e ri g ht o f n o t i ce an d t h e o p p ort u n i t y t o b e hear d

. N e i t her th e

fed eral no r t h e s t at e co n s t i t u t i o n ’ s d ue p ro ces s ri g ht g u ara n t ees a

p art i cu l ar fo rm o r m et h o d o f p ro ced u re, b u t i s s at i s fi ed i f a p art y h as

reas o n ab l e n o t ice an d o p p o rt u n i t y to b e heard

, an d t o p res en t i t s cl ai m

o r d efen se, d u e reg ard bei n g h ad to t h e n at ure o f t h e pro ceed i n g an d th e

ch aract er o f t h e ri g h t s wh i ch m ay b e affect ed b y

i t

.

14(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Co b b Co u n t y S ch

. Di s t

. v. Ba r

ker

, 2 7 1 Ga. 3 5,

3 7 (2 ) (5 1 8 SE2 d 1 2 6) (1 99 9 ).

Th e reco rd refl ect s th at Lewi s w as pro v i ded n ot i ce o f t h e Sav an n ah Co d e

v i o l at i o n s al l eg ed b y

t he Ci t y an d was g i v en am

pl e o p p o rt u n it y t o res p o n d t o t h o s e

al l eg at i o n s d u ri n g t h e t h ree-d ay h e a ri n g co nd u ct ed in reco rd er’ s co u rt

. Pro v i d i n g

Lewi s w i t h n o t i c e a n d a n o p p o rt u n i t y to res p on d t o t h e ch arg es ag ai n s t h i m was

s u ffi ci en t t o s at i s fy h i s d u e p ro ces s ri g h t s

, s ee Ba rker

, 2 7 1 Ga

. a t 3 7 ( 2 ), an d t h e

s u p e r i o r c o u rt t h u s co m

m i t t ed n o erro r in u p h o ld in g th e d eci s i o n o f t h e reco rd er’ s

co u r t san ct i o n i n g L ewi s fo r v i o l at i n g th e Sav an n ah Co d e b y o p erat in g ro o m i n g

h o u s es o n t h e 2 0 p ro p ert i es

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m e d i n pa r t ; r ever

s ed i n p a r t ; va ca t ed i n p a rt ; a n d ca s e

r ema n d ed f o r r es en t en ci n g . Ra

y a n d McMi l li a n, JJ., co n cu r

.

15