Dior v. State
Dior v. State
525 So. 2d 1036; 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1379; 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2341; 1988 WL 58512
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Dior v. State
Opinion of the Court
Where the defendant’s alleged profane statements were uttered out of the court’s hearing, the resulting conviction for direct criminal contempt was reversible error. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.830; Pugliese v. Pugliese, 347 So.2d 422 (Fla. 1977). The State confesses the error.
Reversed and remanded.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.