Case Name: Maurice GRAHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-09-15
Citations: 419 So. 2d 398
Docket Number: No. 81-1880
Parties: Maurice GRAHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 419
Pages: 398–399

Head Matter:
Maurice GRAHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 81-1880.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Sept. 15, 1982.
Ray Sandstrom of Sandstrom & Haddad, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Russell S. Bohn, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
HERSEY, Judge.
We reverse the verdict and judgment on order to show cause in this criminal contempt proceeding. There is a lack of substantial competent evidence to support the finding, necessarily implicit in the verdict and judgment, that appellant was clearly and explicitly directed by the trial court to personally appear at a certain time and place. Lawrence v. Lawrence, 384 So.2d 279 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Further, it was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt (Hamilton v. State, 363 So.2d 580 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)) that appellant failed to provide an explanation for his absence or that he was readily available and able to attend or to contact the court with an explanation. Accordingly we reverse the judgment of criminal contempt and remand for the entry of an acquittal.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.