MICHAEL SPEAR
v.
STATE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court reversed sentences and contempt conviction where trial court failed to conduct proper evidentiary hearing on willfulness of failure to appear and denied procedural due process in contempt proceedings.
A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a defendant's failure to comply with a Quarterman agreement was willful, and must afford procedural due process in contempt proceedings by separately informing the defendant of the right to present mitigating circumstances.
[1] A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a defendant's failure to comply with a Quarterman agreement was willful before imposing sentence.
[2] Indirect criminal contempt proceedings require procedural due process, including separate notice and a distinct opportunity for the defendant to present mitigating circum…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“merely asking defendant if he wished to explain behavior was insufficient; rather, court must inform defendant that he can present mitigating circumstances and give 'a separate and distinct opportunity' for him to do so”
Citing Garrett v. State for the procedural due process requirement in contempt proceedings
Appellant failed to appear for a scheduled sentencing hearing, resulting in the trial court imposing a substantial prison sentence and adjudicating hi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Quarterman Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s failure to appear for a scheduled sentencing hearing resulted in the imposition of a substantial prison sentence pursuant to Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d
1380 (Fla. 1988). The trial court also adjudicated Appellant guilty of indirect criminal contempt for his failure to appear. We reverse the sentences imposed in case numbers 2016-CF-039801 and 2016-CF-047845, and remand for an evidentiary hearing and factual determination as to whether Appellant’s failure to comply with the Quarterman agreement was willful. We also reverse the conviction and sentence for indirect criminal contempt because the trial court did not afford procedural due process. See Garrett v.
State, 876 So. 2d 24, 25 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (merely asking defendant if he wished to explain behavior was insufficient; rather, court must inform defendant that he can present mitigating circumstances and give “a separate and distinct opportunity” for him to do so).
On remand, Appellant shall be afforded a new sentencing hearing and a new hearing on the contempt charge.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
TORPY, WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Spear v. State, 294 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)
Authorities Cited
- Garrett v. State, 876 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)