Case Name: The STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Stephen H. BUTTER, Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1989-08-01
Citations: 546 So. 2d 1171
Docket Number: No. 89-754
Parties: The STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Stephen H. BUTTER, Respondent.
Judges: Before BASKIN, JORGENSON and COPE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 546
Pages: 1171–1172

Head Matter:
The STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Stephen H. BUTTER, Respondent.
No. 89-754.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Aug. 1, 1989.
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.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
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.