In the second case of its kind, the first in Florida, the Tennessee Court of Appeals in Knoxville, has affirmed a 30 day jail term based on violation of a court order which directed a Tennessee ham (Michael J. Mgrdichian, N2FUV) to refrain from contacting another ham. The trial court, and now the appeals court, have declared that Michael J. Mgrdichian violated the court’s directive on 3 occasions, resulting in 3 separate jail sentences for 10 days each.

The victim in the case asked for a temporary order of protection, which was granted. The order specified that Michael Mgrdichian was not to contact the victim. The pertinent command for this appeal stated that Respondent Mgrdichian would “not contact the petitioner either directly or indirectly, by phone, email, messages, mail, or any other type of communication or contact.”

After violating the order by contacting the victim on three occasions via ham radio, and being found guilty of criminal contempt of court, Mgrdichian argued in his appeal that the trial court lacked jurisdiction due to FCC preemption of radio matters, and that he did not know that he was facing three jail terms and three fines, by violating the court order on three occasions.

In a June 4th hearing, the victim returned to court to complain that the perpetrator was continuing the behaviors previously complained about, and Michael J. Mgrdichian was found guilty and fined for two additional counts of civil contempt of court, adding to the three original counts of criminal contempt.

The victim has also complained that Michael J. Mgrdichian lied to to the court in official documents, and asked the court to issue subpoenas regarding a number of emails, specifically to unmask the IP addresses of the senders, to match the IP addresses to Mr. Mgrdichian’s IP address for future proceedings, either civil or criminal, or both. The victim was instructed by the court on how to obtain the subpoenas sought.

On June 11, 2020, the state appeals court in TN found that Mgrdichian had received adequate notice in court documents, and that the trial court’s jail sentences and fines were appropriate. The appeals court affirmed the trial court and remanded the case for further proceedings as deemed necessary. The court decisively found that FCC rules do not preclude a state court from preventing an amateur from stalking and harassing another amateur in the same state, and that in those cases, local courts have jurisdiction.

In short, at least in TN and FL, the FCC rules do not prevent a local court from issuing an order of protection containing a penalty of jail time for violation, when one amateur is alleged to be harassing and stalking another amateur, within the same state. Moreover, TN and FL have now both affirmed the court’s authority to jail perpetrators who violate said court orders, even when contact is via amateur radio.

In reaching their decision, the Florida court relied heavily on the brief filed by the victim, and on their own analysis, which contained a previous Florida case, where the respondent also argued that the FCC preempted the local court’s authority.

https://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/faucon_v._mgridichian_e2019-01343.pdf

https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/fifth-district-court-of-appeal/2008/5d07-2590-op.html