Document: 418 U.S. 506 94 S.Ct. 2707 41 L.Ed.2d 912 Dominick CODISPOTI and Herbert Langnes, Petitioners,v.State of PENNSYLVANIA. Daniel T. TAYLOR, III, Petitioner, v. John P. HAYES, Judge, Jefferson Circuit Court, Criminal Branch, Second Division. Nos. 73—5615, 73—473. Supreme Court the United States June 26, 1974 Robert L. Eberhardt, Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondent, pro hac vice, by special leave Court. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court.** 1 In December 1966, petitioners Codispoti Langnes were codefendants with Richard Mayberry in a criminal trial ending verdict guilty. Each acted as his own counsel, although legal advice was available from appointed counsel. At conclusion trial, judge pronounced guilty 11 contempts committed during sentenced him to one two years each contempt. given like sentences seven separate contempts. on six citations. Mayberry's total sentence thus 22 years, Codispoti's 14 Langnes' 12 years. The contempt convictions affirmed Pennsylvania This granted petition certiorari, 397 1020, 90 1266, 25 530, vacated judgment court, directing that 'on remand another judge, not bearing sting these slanderous remarks having impersonal authority law, (sit) conduct petitioner shown record.' Pennsylvania, 400 455, 466, 91 499, 505, 27 532 (1971). 2 charges against then tried proceedings before judge.1 demand jury denied. He also moved subpoena witnesses 'to prove my actions did disrupt proceedings, I intend (sic) contemptuous, it merely an answer provocation made presiding Judge.' App. 47. motion denied, court remarking 'this is issue between you, record will speak you counsel can yourself.' Ibid. proceeded, State offering into evidence relevant portions transcript 1966 course which alleged occurred. rested. neither testified nor called witnesses. found he had contemptuous acts charged months prison term three another, all run consecutively. 3 Petitioner followed very similar course.2 five terms months, be served 4 filed stating 'the only points at are validity sentences. question guilt has been confirmed both . ., therefore testimony this hearing limited 35. held entitled 5 'because questions juries' decisions would already adjudicated adversely Defendants appellate courts. Furthermore, instant cases no imprisonment excess imposed any offense. offenses occurred different times dates.' Id., 36 (footnote omitted). 6 without opinion, justice dissenting ground trial. 453 Pa. 619, 306 A.2d 294. We certiorari those raising whether should have afforded 414 1063, 569, 38 468 (1973).3 7 * Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 88 1444, 20 491 (1968), Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed defendants state trials right provided Sixth Amendment. companion case, Bloom Illinois, 194, 1477, 522 while petty contempts, other crimes, could jury, serious if defendant insisted mode Although about seriousness crime normally heavily influenced penalty authorized legislature, where legislative specified left discretion often true case contempt, pettiness or judged actually imposed. Finally, recognized up innocence being determined but conviction nonjury sustained 24 prison. 8 Since time, our established fixed dividing line offenses: crimes carrying more than less crimes. Frank States, 395 147, 149—150, 89 1503, 1505 1506, 23 162 (1969); Baldwin New York, 399 66, 69, 1886, 1888, 26 437 (1970).4 Under cases, we plainly cannot accept petitioners' argument contemnor simply because strong possibility exists face substantial upon conviction, regardless punishment See Taylor Hayes, 488, 2697, 897. Our however, do expressly address remaining they after post-trial consecutively and, aggregated jail.5 II 9 There recurring situations maintain order courtroom integrity process 'actual obstruction justice,' re McConnell, 370 230, 236, 82 1288, 1292, 434 (1962); see Little, 404 553, 555, 92 659, 660, 30 708 (1972), convicts accused attorneys either side various occur. Undoubtedly, necessity circumstances warrants, may summarily act punished months. Nor does exhaust power convict punish whenever exceeds Cf. Seale, 461 F.2d 345, 355 (CA7 1972). 10 supra, recognized, consistently done, need deliberative atmosphere courtroom. quell disturbance attend impaneling jury.' U.S., 210, S.Ct., 1486. '(A) constitutional sense, take place bedlam .. A hallowed must proceed dignity ..' Illinois Allen, 337, 351, 1057, 1064, 353 (1970) (separate Douglas, J.). N. Dorsen & Friedman, Disorder Court: Report Association Bar City Special Committee Courtroom Conduct 10—23 (1973); Burger, Necessity Civility, 52 F.R.D. 211, 214—215 13 'To allow disruptive activities prevent profit wrong. Constitution protect none us prevented courts acting preserve processes itself prescribes.' 350, 1064 (Brennan, J., concurring). More recently, again noted when faced kind there issue, 'could, propriety, instantly acted, holding 463, 504. That meted out jail invalidate sentences, dealt discrete matter point III 15 When postpones until final lawyer several many overriding action justification dispensing ordinary rudiments due process. 463 464, 504; Groppi Leslie, 496, 499—507, 582, 584—589, 632 (1972); 497, 2702. Moreover, who, retrospect, determines how citation cover. It or, here, who determine absent impose concurrently. context post-verdict adjudication appears posed likelihood arbitrary requirement intended avoid alleviate. ibid. 16 jury-trial guarantee reflects 'a profound way law enforced administered. oppression Government.' 155, 1451 represents 'deep commitment Nation defense enforcement 156, 1451. 17 'criminal every fundamental respect (I)n considerations make difference Indeed, even compelling providing protection exercise official power. Contemptuous conduct, though public wrong, strikes most vulnerable human qualities judge's temperament. Even direct insult frequently rejection judicial authority, interference duties officers court.' 201—202, 1482. 18 us, original petitioners, them Because latter consecutive individual bore ultimate critical importance. Here seriatim proceeding, rather concurrently, ruling necessarily extended beyond allowable As result single acts, eight imposed, obviously what equivalent offense 19 find unavailing respondent's contrary that, months' offense, triable jury. Notwithstanding characterization salient fact remains arose proceeding. aggregated, taking account others beginning immediately preceding expired. Neither impressed contention today's decision provoke judges awaiting calmer, studied proceeding deliberating 'in cool reflection subsequent events.' Yates 76, 78 128, 134, 95 (1957) Summary unwarranted facts invulnerable review. Sacher 343 1, 9, 13, 72 451, 457, 96 L.Ed. 717 (1952).6 21 court's view conclusively expressing condemnation reaffirm, purport affirm conviction. On contrary, affirming new required sit 505. reversed remanded further inconsistent opinion. So ordered. Reversed remanded. MARSHALL, concurring part. concur Parts Court's However, join Part suggests situation such here unlimited number separate, six-month 'for trial,' so long punishes occurrence act. view, equally applicable situation. observes '(t)he enforcement." Ante, 2693, quoting 1451, (1968). recognizes prosecutor, 'determin(ing) cover'; trier fact, jury'; 'impos(ing) determin(ing) concurrently.' 2693. Thus, concludes, 'there alleviate.' agree. But completely fail allegedly occurs, end try suggestion provides incentive heat moment, encourages purpose eliminate. 28 offenses, determinative. Accordingly, today holds constitutionally '(i)n offense.' rejects State's purposes pointing aggregated. With respect, same summary Where defendant, think treated requires seeks use instances tries together 222—224 (1973). 29 advanced support position 'overriding order.' 2692. rejected 209—210, 1486—1487, There, too, suggested exception rule requiring presence courtroom.' acknowledge 'strong temptation' so, sufficient justify requirement. Equally important, am convinced necessity' repeated No clearer statement problem disorder its solution Black's 343—344, 1061, (1970): 31 'It essential proper administration dignity, order, decorum hallmarks country. flagrant disregard elementary standards tolerated. believe confronted disruptive, contumacious, stubbornly defiant meet case. formula maintaining appropriate best situations. least permissible ways handle obstreperous Allen: (1) bind gag him, thereby keeping present; (2) cite contempt; (3) promises himself properly.' 32 Allen set alternative dealing disorder. Today Brothers alternatives sanction judge-imposed remedy. nothing approves succession citations unable giving specific authorization. too big step positive declaration necessary hand. 33 availability remedies forth persuasive proof effectively resulting lengthy terms. 235. probably effective deal problem. series failed check defendant's restore demonstrates unlikely so. Either correct prolong disruptions orderly Rather permit over initial warning, concurring), next disruption sentence, plus firm warning binding gagging removing properly. approach 'dignity, decorum' Black spoke successive future disruptions, running afoul Amendment's 34 BLACKMUN, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, STEWART, REHNQUIST join, dissenting. 35 charge exceeded consisted lawyer's filing spurious probate. open court. Where, takes outside little distinguish using factfinder, run-of-the-mill logical one. present took incident details fully preserved record. specify leaves unclear facts, any, remain determined. loss, therefore, role perform. perceived remove contemned assigning judge. 897; And, out, since mitigating excessive punishment. 37 determination basically undisputed constitute particularly inappropriate task Before today, always exclusive province never involving contempt.* believe, practical matter, function serve this, extension include direct, incourt I, respectfully dissent. REHNQUIST, JUSTICE joins II, 39 These graphic illustrations manner limitations fashioned virtually whole cloth 20-odd (1952), speaking through Jackson, said: 40 'Summary always, rightly, regarded disfavor passion pettiness, brings discredit certainly penalizes. reasons led system vest presides summary. rights immunities persons exposed obvious abuse bench possess exert curb prejudicial zeal prosecutors. interests society preservation control frustrated unchecked improprieties defenders.' 8, 454. culmination recent trend innovation emasculates historic If holdings area product historical insight meaning Amendment, indeed desirable progression toward reign light dubious ancestry, occasion concern. hodgepodge doctrine embodied decisions, irretrievably blended guarantees impartial judges, fragments federal courts, consistent thread emerges inveterate propensity second-guess 42 897, holds, squarely Sacher, respondent petitioner, respondent. apparently concludes completed, refused respond, petitioner's violated. 43 odds Sacher. involved aftermath Communist Party leaders violating Smith Act. Upon receiving verdict, Judge Medina Southern District York once certificate under Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 42(a), finding including represented himself, Federal Rule 42(a) then, now, '(a) certifies saw heard constituting actual shall recite signed entered contemnors argued waited them, expired, provisions 42(b) notice became applicable. contention: 44 'The contemplates occasions arise arrest nature continuance break gives summarily. contend permits exercise, emergency survived longer administered method allowed 42(b). 'summary' used refer timing reference refers procedure dispenses formality, delay digression issuance process, service complaint answer, hearings, evidence, listening arguments, briefs, submission findings, goes conventional inform events within knowledge. allows knowledge presence. 45 '. To summon pronounce prejudice client. might done public. Only naive inexperienced assume news reach jurors. construction quite text contention, add prejudice. .' 9—10, 455. 46 suggest procedures subject infirmity. Yet now upheld unitary confines decades ago employed State. surely come something shock decide utilize punishing 47 prior continuously adhered '(w)here directly eye 'upon offender. proof, form." Savin, 131 267, 277, 699, 702, 150 (1889), Ex parte Terry, 128 289, 309, 77, 81, 405 (1888). Cooke 267 517, 535, 390, 394, 69 767 (1925); Fisher Pace, 336 159 160, 425, 427—428, 93 569 (1949).1 one, i.e., observed becomes some qualification. Oliver, 333 257, 274 276, 68 508—509, 682 (1948). 48 relied wholly Taylor. Groppi, Assembly Wisconsin Legislature passed resolution citing body, days previously. adequate hearing. lawyers, warnings opportunity their behalf speak. Sacher; repeatedly warned informed permitted indicates agrees Kentucky Appeals "(t)he coming surprise Taylor, following time court." 496 2702, 494 S.W.2d 737, 741—742 (Ky.1973). 49 agreement Taylor's reversed, nevertheless again, While conceding personal attack calm detachment fair adjudication, (1971), 'it become embroiled controversy petitioner.' 501, 2705. portion described repudiation principle laid down Sacher: 50 'A advocated deny except, perhaps, moment forestall abortion His recourse, said, accuser complaining witness 51 expresses limitation, inference almost inescapable. inevitable authority. much interchangeably countless opinions generally literature other. minor indifferent evaded adding hectoring, abusive individual. Such interpretation nullify, practice, purports grant.' 12, 456 (emphasis added). interpreting language slightest infirmities procedures, require retrial Twelve later, Ungar Sarafite, 376 575, 84 841, 921 (1964), reaffirmed principles different. indicated 'unwilling bottom disqualification solely disobedience orders criticism rulings irascible sensitive fairly impartially resistance highly arguments soundness decisions.' 584, 847. 53 wisdom policy Offutt 348 11, 75 99 (1954); 390 (1925), By disqualified trying adopted disavowed worthy mention extraordinary concedes affords precedent pains driven case.' teaching Mayberry, precisely opposite: sufficiently astute read new-found enunciated decisions. Whether added procedural conferred lawyers worth sacrifice debate, absence basis reaches me clear doubt. dissent reversal case.2 54 litigation chapter Charles Dickens' Bleak House. beneficiaries case.3 concluding carried mandate letter, received substantially lenient first instance. Nonetheless, batting eye, decides decided result, seem indicate Mayberry. 55 Codispoti, analogous Jenkins Delaware, 213, 1677, 253 (1969), strongly Jenkins, convicted murder burglary. During pendency appeal Miranda Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 694 (1966), Johnson Jersey, 719, 1772, 882 'applies began date (the Miranda) 721, 1775 reversing grounds, Delaware determined, sua sponte, obtained advising admissible retrial. retried second-degree murder, affirmed. rejecting excluded evidence. apply whose retrials commenced begun date. 56 originally 1966. May 20, 1968. And DeStefano Woods, 392 631, 2093, 1308 (1968) (per curiam), retroactively 'trials (begun) 1968.' 635, 2096. Bloom, benefit trials. receive rejoinder involve instead 'uncorrectable police which, illegal, preclude perhaps gathered reliance then-existing law.' prospective application turn occurred, tell why requirements says govern 57 marked sharp departure retrial, acceptance Bloom's governing warrant examination effects. attorney, classic 'indirect contempt,' accorded full Evidence tending show third party engaged draw death putative testator; years' imprisonment. maximum relying provide indicator defined Duncan. prosecution Amendments, charges. 58 495—496, 2691, makes clear, evolved whereby statute Presumably, case-law (1970), supervisory applied rule, Cheff Schnackenberg, 373, 1523, 629 dictate rule. 7—2 punishable two-year prosecutions. Harlan, dissent, joined Stewart, forcefully indication drafters States. fairman, Does Incorporate Bill Rights? Original Understanding, Stan.L.Rev. (1949); Morrison, Judicial Interpretation, 140 (1949). course, plurality Members Chief Stewart dissented. 59 woodenly applies regard significant differences import decision. applying origin counts less, plurality's proposition sine qua non commands majority sub silentio passage force reason. 60 direction indirect normal save awarding effect fact-finding transferred wrong intelligible. presided Langnes. appear seriously challenged factual allegations surmise lack dispute typical based 61 196—197, 1478—1479, thought expected mitigate harshness visited contemnor. whatever allocates sentencing presumably hear relatively returns length controlling factor determining awarded, severity possible seems questionable limits returned succeeded engraft onto traditional adjudicating 'fifth wheel' appreciably furthering goals supra. 62 concession 'may months.' 514, upshot inclined adjudicate adjuration '(s)ummary review.' 2694. What portends is, say, 'anybody's guess.' 63 Pennsylvania. ** DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, POWELL. were: '1. Albert A. Fiok, J. November 18, he, authorities saying, 'Are authorities, Your Honor? Is your reason?' '2. aforesaid 29, kowtowing railroading life saying still kowtowed railroaded imprisonment.' '3. 30, 'Caesar' misconduct 'You're railroad us.' across tyrannical display corruption life.' '4. addressed insolent derogatory going codefendant crazy? You crazy him.' '5. 2, conspiracy officials 'I Court.' '6. created despicable scene continue calling unless ordered mistrial, general creating uproar, uproar cause termination '7. constant boisterous interrupted attempts utter confusion chaos.' 33—34. 28, 'For record, begins want institution.' threatened blow head off, 'If that's exactly I'll do. don't give damn not. got force, will. That's hell I'm do.' 'Like told me—you illegal mean it. Now refuse go badger witnesses, unfair do, punk. off. understand that?' 5, 'Go hell.' 'One reason, gotten contact local papers sharpen hatchet heads accusing causing taxpayers fifty grand gave atmosphere. papers, be, costing money. Maroney, Commonwealth money.' scurrilous far concerned, communist Russia, China, Cuba men you. wherever came infiltrated well Russia.' object swear mother's name keep promise threats made. Don't worry interrupting summation. won't dignify stinking punk, hell, shake hands damned you.' Also, 'You dead man, stone dead. Honor." 30—31. stated petition, follows: Should cumulative trial? trial?' tracing lineage ascertaining REHNQUIST's implicitly authenticity Putting aside 'constitutional Bloom' ever 'evolved' note explicitly embraced demarcation Douglas concurred judgment. reading 'all crimes,' expressed necessitate Five participating therefor agreed least, prosecutions My Brother submits application. finds misreading applicability peculiar unmistakably 'we reverse failure grant 1968, Louisiana Illinois.' 2096 exempt date, one-half boundaries retroactive impact advisedly established, requirement, definition, relates trials, uncorrectable law. here. 'When duty bound independent See, e.g., Edwards South Carolina, 372 229, 235, 83 680, 683, 697; Blackburn Alabama, 361 199, 205, n. 80 274, 279, 242.' Brookhart Janis, 4, 1245, 1247, 314 (1966). 1486, acknowledged temptation establish disorders unnecessary decision, resisted declined recognize exception. out-of-court lead inevitably reached decline follow dictum carries implication. cited Barnett, 681, 984, 991, (1964). (1888), stated: 'We seen settled jurisprudence England country, supposed conflict liberty citizen, superior jurisdiction, offender may, discretion, apprehended imprisoned, occurred; according unbroken chain reaching back earliest times, power, liable abuse, absolutely discharge functions. Without it, tribunals mercy disorderly violent, laws enacted vindication private rights, administering them.' 313, 83. 534, 394. agree Their From affirmance 478, 255 sought review Though about, somehow They newly judge; convicted, disturb award incarcerated pursuant presumably,

Category: 0