Berman v. State, 253 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). · Go Syfert
Search
Berman v. State, 253 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Speller v. State (fladistctapp, 1974-12-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Speller v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1974 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Berman v. State (Fla.App.3d, 1971), 253 So.2d 144 . [3] 391 U.S. 194 , 88 S.Ct. 1477 , 20 L.Ed.2d 522 (1968). [4] (Fla. 1973), 284 So.2d 673 . [5] Repealed by ch. 70-339, § 180, Laws of Fla. 1970.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bernard BERMAN
v.
The STATE of Florida
No. 71-177.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct 12, 1971.
253 So. 2d 144
Ginsberg & Goldman, North Miami Beach, for appellant., Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and William L. Rogers, Legal Intern., for appellee.
Carroll, Pearson, Swann.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment and sentence entered by the trial court for a charged direct criminal contempt. The judgment and sentence must be reversed upon the authority of Moore v. State, Fla.App.1971, 24S So.2d 880. The state attempts to argue that there was a substantial compliance with rule 1.830, Fla. Rules of Criminal Procedure, 33 F.S.A., but the record reveals: (1) a failure to recite in the judgment those facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based, (2) a failure to inform the defendant prior to adjudication[*145] of the accusation against him, (3) a failure to inquire as to whether the defendant had any cause to show why he should not be adjudged guilty, (4) a failure to give the defendant an opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances.

Reversed.