Case Name: James Bernard DAVIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-03-24
Citations: 595 So. 2d 302
Docket Number: No. 91-1807
Parties: James Bernard DAVIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, NESBITT and LEVY, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 595
Pages: 302–303

Head Matter:
James Bernard DAVIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 91-1807.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 24, 1992.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Barbara Arlene Fink, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, NESBITT and LEVY, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
James Bernard Davis, the defendant, was adjudicated guilty of direct criminal contempt, pursuaht to Rule 3.830 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, for abusive language. The Court sentenced the defendant to six months imprisonment. The defendant contends that the trial court did not conduct a proper hearing, as is required by Rule 3.830, before summarily adjudicating him guilty of direct contempt of court. We agree.
Rule 3.830 requires that:
[p]rior to the adjudication of guilt the judge shall inform the defendant of the accusation against him and inquire as to whether he has any cause to show why he should not be adjudged guilty of contempt by the Court and sentenced therefor. The defendant shall be given the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances.
The record shows that the trial court failed to follow the clear provisions of Rule 3.830. Therefore, the adjudication of contempt is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with the provisions of Rule 3.830.
Reversed and remanded.