Potts v. State

Appellant, subpoenaed as a witness in a judicial proceeding, refused to testify, as a result of which the court found appellant to be in direct criminal contempt of the court.

There was no error in holding appellant in contempt of court, as his refusal to testify was without legal justification. There is a technical error in the judgment in that it fails to include a recital of those facts upon which the adjudication of guilt is based, as required by Rule 3.830 RCrP. See, Miller v. State, 305 So.2d 826 (Fla.App. 4th 1975).

The record also discloses a discrepancy between the circuit court…