Opinion ID: 2626169
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Standard of Review Contempt

Text: [¶ 37] The standard of review for contempt proceedings involving child custody matters is well-developed: The standard of review enunciated in other child custody and domestic relations contempt cases is applicable to this matter. Crites v. Alston, 837 P.2d 1061, 1066 (Wyo. 1992). In Goss v. Goss, 780 P.2d 306, 313 (Wyo. 1989), we said that [w]e will not disturb the decision of the trial court ... in the absence of some serious procedural error, a violation of a principle of law, or a clear and grave abuse of discretion. See also Deen v. Deen, 774 P.2d 621 (Wyo.1989) and Fanning v. Fanning, 717 P.2d 346 (Wyo.1986). Id.; see also Rogers v. Rogers, 973 P.2d 1118, 1121 (Wyo.1999). Judicial discretion is a composite of many things, among which are conclusions drawn from objective criteria; it means exercising sound judgment with regard to what is right under the circumstances and without doing so arbitrarily or capriciously. Belless v. Belless, 2001 WY 41, ¶ 6, 21 P.3d 749, [751] (Wyo.2001); see also Vaughn v. State, 962 P.2d 149, 151 (Wyo.1998). We must determine whether the trial court could reasonably conclude as it did and whether any facet of its ruling was arbitrary or capricious. Belless, ¶ 6. Erhart v. Evans, 2001 WY 79, ¶ 11, 30 P.3d 542, 545 (Wyo.2001); McElwain v. McElwain, 2005 WY 147, ¶ 6, 123 P.3d 558, 561 (Wyo.2005). If the record includes sufficient evidence to support the district court's exercise of discretion, we uphold its decision. In re KJD, 2002 WY 26, ¶ 21, 41 P.3d 522, 527 (Wyo.2002).