Legal Document

418 U.S. 488 94 Supreme Court Reporter 2697 41 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 897 Daniel T. TAYLOR, III, Petitioner,v.John Pacific KF135 P2 HAYES, Judge, Jefferson Circuit Court, Criminal Branch, Second Division. Number 73—473. Argued March 18, 1974. Decided June 26, Syllabus During a Kentucky murder trial in which petitioner was counsel for the accused, respondent judge informed on nine different occasions that he contempt of court. At conclusion trial, respondent, jury's presence, made statement concerning petitioner's conduct, and, refusing request to respond, imposed consecutive sentences counts aggregating almost four and one-half years' imprisonment, including one year's imprisonment each two counts. Subsequently, amended judgment eliminate first charge reduce latter six months' but silent whether all were run concurrently or consecutively. The Appeals affirmed, ruled that, because did not direct be served consecutively, they had concurrently, thereby making penalty actually months jail rendering constitutionally permissible conviction sentence without jury trial. Held: 1. Since no more than six-month imposed, eight contempts, considered singly collectively, constituted petty offenses hence by required. It is improper permit State, as this instance, after conviction, less rather retry with jury, since 'criminal crime sort requires right regardless involved.' Bloom versus Illinois, 391 194, 211, 88 1477, 1487, 20 522. Pp. 495—496. 2. Respondent's proceeding summarily punish alleged committed during giving him an opportunity heard defense mitigation before finally adjudged guilty does square Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. Groppi Leslie, 404 496, 92 582, 30 632. Reasonable notice specific charges are essential view heightened potential abuse posed power. 496—500. 3. Because it appears from record 'marked personal feelings present both sides' marks 'unseemly conduct (had) left stings,' Mayberry Pennsylvania, 400 455, 464, 91 499, 504, 27 532, another should have been substituted purpose disposing charges. 501—503. Ky., 494 South Western Reporter, 2nd 737, reversed remanded. Robert Allen Sedler, Lexington, petitioner. Henry Atlantic Triplett, Louisville, respondent. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 question case concerns validity criminal entered against reason certain events occurring course courts Commonwealth Kentucky. Petitioner retained Narvel Tinsley, Negro, who along his brother Michael charged murders police officers. According Appeals, 'murders created some considerable sensation Louisville . newspaper coverage overly abundant.' 739 (1973). Trial began October 1971, completed 29. 2 On turbulent out hearing most often chambers, immediately reduced warning at time any other instance. permitted respond most, all, charges.1 3 29 verdict returned, presence conduct. Refusing declaring 'I you' counts, proceeded impose term count totaling years: days count, 60 second, 90 third, four, five, six, seven, year nine, 'all consecutive.'2 A few later, also barred practicing law division Branch 4 While appeal pending, 2, 1972, corrected containing 'certificate' described contempt3 eliminated having last jail. 5 holding every charged. In its view, actions 'were deliberate, delaying, planned disruptive tactics fact create such atmosphere court he, if continue, would appeared star performer center ring three-ring circus.' S.W.2d, 740. 'innumerable acts clearly reflected well judicial system .' 'overbearing, contemptuous, obnoxiously persistent questions objections ..' Id., 741. concluded launched 'personal attack' neither conducted himself "activist seeking combat" nor become so personally embroiled disqualified sit contempt, although remarks prior entering 'inappropriate.' 744—745. 6 further 'direct sentences, amended, consecutively must concurrently.' 746. Thus, '(t)he Taylor (was) jail,' deemed permissible. 747. ruled, however, exclusive authority discipline disbar attorneys event, rule 1917 suspension practice punishment contempt. order prohibiting Division, therefore reversed. We granted certiorari limited specified issues, 414 1063, 568, 38 468 7 * contends court, exception, tried jury. Quite contrary, our cases hold like may offense when exceed longer has expressly authorized statute. Cheff Schnackenberg, 384 373, 86 1523, 16 629 (1966); 522 (1968); Dyke Implement Mfg. Co., Inc., 216, 1472, 538 Frank States, 395 147, 89 1503, 23 162 (1969); Baldwin New York, 399 66, 1886, 26 437 (1970). Hence, ultimately found sentenced separately were, held, equivalent single months. Cf. Codispoti 506, 2687, 912. original separate totaled years, individual carrying sentence. But itself understood sixmonth thus offenses, 8 argued State permitted, obviate thrust decisions, contrary: absence legislative authorization serious penalties choose try determines discern material difference between choice permitting supra, U.S., 380, 1526. either case, determined warrant remain firmly proposition 1487; cf. Argersinger Hamlin, 407 25, 30, 2006, 2009, 32 530 (1972). II 9 persuaded contention entitled received final instance instances, time. quite true, citations coming end could surprise Taylor, upon occasion following act court.' 741—742. appear us adjudication until returned. then describe characterize various find those acts. 10 plain sought what referred court's 'declaration based judge's observations' trial,4 '(y)ou're responding me anything' even indicated might gagged insisted defending himself.5 formality years county bar forever issue tried. 11 This procedure concerned here power, maintaining courtroom, contemptuous observed him. Ex parte Terry, 128 289, 77, L.Ed. 405 (1888). usual justification necessity, see Offutt 348 11, 14, 75 13, 99 (1954), nearly cogent postponed trial.6 Our decisions establish summary need always all. proper circumstances, particularly where offender lawyer representing client proceedings. Sacher 343 1, 72 451, 96 717 (1952); 463, 532 (1971). noted '(s) ummary always, rightly, regarded disfavor 8, 454. '(W)e stated again reasonable 'basic jurisprudence." 502, 586, 632 (1972), quoting re Oliver, 333 257, 273, 68 507, 682 (1948). Even 'the contemnor normally given speak own behalf nature allocution.' 587 (and cited therein).7 12 hand, delayed, 'it much difficult argue action kind necessary preserve enable (the court) proceed business.' Ibid. As we Groppi, contemnors 'given speak' 'trial would, doubt(,) modified their statements proved persuasive.' n. S.Ct., 588. counsels attorney adjudicated behalf. say, full-scale appropriate. Usually, occurred eyes, reporter's transcript available. least urge, example, behavior acceptable client; or, matters otherwise attempt make amends 503, 506 588.8 13 These procedures 202, 1482; 12, 456. provision fundamental due process protections accords historic notions elementary fairness. desire 'to imprison discretion judges within rigid mechanical rules,' 15, unpersuaded additional expense possible involved will seriously handicap effective functioning courts.' b. 208—209, 1486. cannot measured minutes hours dollars cents. For accused facing sentence, 'liberty valuable seen protection Its termination calls orderly process, however informal.' Morrissey Brewer, 408 471, 482, 2593, 2601, 33 484 14 these minimum requirements extended set aside.9 III 15 convinced again, agree constitute attack reaction lack it, '(un) likely maintain calm detachment fair adjudication.' 465, 505. though short attack, still provoke embroil controversy 'hold balance nice, clear, true state Tumey Ohio, 273 510, 47 437, 444, 71 749 (1927). ultimate judgment, inquiry only there actual bias respondent's part, 'such likelihood appearance unable vindicating interests accused.' Ungar Sarafite, 376 575, 588, 84 841, 849, 921 (1964). 'Such stringent sometimes do very best weigh scales justice equally contending parties,' less. Murchison, 349 133, 136, 623, 625, 942 (1955). 17 With considerations mind, examined running Moreover, progressed, mounting display unfavorable attitude toward petitioner, ability, motives, sufficiently judge. 18 Early cautioned 'putting show' added 'if you give inch, he'll take mile. & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions now.' App. 31, 40. asserted defend replied, 'I'm sure.' 61. When remarked five wrapped up retorted '(b)efore it's over, lot that.' 98. complained 'overbearing contentiousness regard me, phrase utterances,' prejudicing case. 60. Respondent likewise said 'using (the) brute power your office' saying damaging client. occasion, asserting rigged 85—86. 19 That reacted strongly throughout 10-day emerged sentencing characterized There put worst display' many bar—'(a)s far concerned, you're not.' 28. Furthermore, denied time, threatened gag forthwith jail, mention later disbarring He refused grant bail pending appeal. assume purposes contemptuous; nevertheless, magnitude reflects extent became involved. 17, 15. From reading record, 504. fellow relies impressed 'did purport gave afforded dispassionately decorum befitting proceeding.' 849.10 21 Nothing construed condone type engaged Behavior place courtroom which, free society, forum courteous reasoned pursuit truth justice. 22 remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. So ordered. 24 Judgment 25 DOUGLAS joins Parts Court's MARSHALL, dissenting part. join Part convicted prison. my marked 'serious' 'petty' called into play Sixth Amendment 28 subsequently realized error characterizes determination sentence.' Ante, 496. reduction transparent effort circumvent save necessity airing impartial hardly coincidence maximum permit. Today's decision represents extraordinarily wooden application fashioned determine applicable. obvious device succeed, think changes distinguish contempts arbitrary barrier behind wish protect convictions exposing harsh light safely hide. substantial maximum, fairness suspect, especially require scrutiny Statements plurality 1526, (1966), contrary notwithstanding, believe deprived once attached through imposition subsequent appellate reducing sixth reply next recess. respect episode. seventh undertook discussion apparently ordered excluded eighth shows, denial response connection ninth charge. complete 29, petitioner: 'The Court: something sir, 'Mr. Taylor: Well, I'll here, Judge. I've weeks listen you. Now, going me. Stand sir. 'For ever law. You've quoted couldn't way. You know completely upon, law, Doctrine Doubt. That's exactly means, reason. doesn't mean its's deceit; trickery; confusion. 'Sometimes wonder really motive is, interested client, ulterior motive, Dan Tinsley. 'It's shame Bar Association done long ago. 'As not. want hear this; students community this, rule, exception rule.— (Interrupting) Thank them understand way conducted. officer itself. you, sir— You're anything. Oh yes, will. Yes, not, either. Count One— Unless intend me— (Interposing) that— lawyers you— My quiet, you'll—there contempts— No, said. First Count, jail; Third Fourth Fifth Seventh Eighth Ninth consecutive. 'Take away. answer I'd glad you.' 28—29. certificate follows: 'Contempt questioning prospective juror, second day Voir Dire, repeatedly ignored continue line ask whole, evidenced utter disrespect jurors (T.E. 335—347). sustained objection use cross examine Officer Hogan go escape ruling 1071—1080). playing tape recording voice witness David White, wrote blackboard. After blackboard removed advised summation disrespectful tone manner 'I'll certainly keep Honor' 1355). 4. cross-examination Schroering, interrupted moved recess, overruled seat counsel's table 5. Complete Irvin Foley, (sic) Legal Advisor Police Department continually disobeyed regarding press conference unadmissible (sic). disallowing admittance black persons examination inferring white officers enter courtroom. interruption closing arguments people known 1950—1955). 6. Jesse Officer, read witness, White. Ruling spoke itself, introduced evidence commented merely took statement. continued disregard parts context 2008—2016). 7. examining Norbert Brown, previously into. waved arms derogatory indicating truthful showing 2030—2032). 8. directed call witness. Lt. Garrett, Department. sworn stand, deputy Sheriff Taylor's aide searched, everyone else search aide. begin examination, chamber 2068—2069). 9. asked same Floyd Miller held improper. referring 'this nice officer' 2169—2172).' 24—26. 744 'Punishment (is) ordinarily indispensable constituting assumption saw everything went open (is ( required justify exception; immediate penal vindication dignity it.' Cooke 267 517, 536, 45 390, 395, 69 767 (1925). dealt body, taken several heard. American Advisory Committee Judge's Function recommended, inter alia: 'Notice 'Before imposing adduce argument relevant guilt punishment. 'Commentary 'Although in-court can punished heard, (1888), little commend basic fairness, bring Accordingly, brief matter course. standard, implies plenary required.' Project Standards Justice, Judge § 7.4, Page 95 (Approved Draft 1972). Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 42(b); Harris 382 162, 352, 240 (1965). reached similar conclusion. See, e.g., York Appellate Departments, Special Rules Concerning Decroum 609.2(b) (1971) N. Dorsen L. Friedman, Disorder Report City Courtroom Conduct 352 Brother REHNQUIST's dissent insists rejected teaching (1952), posttrial proceeding, afford full panoply issuance service complaint answer, hearings, taking evidence, listening arguments, awaiting briefs, submission findings, goes conventional trial.' 9, 455 (emphasis added). decided today 'reasonable behalf,' received. Nowhere intimate 'a appropriate.' Ibid.; supra. whatever justifications necessitate integrity face 'actual obstruction justice," 513, 2692 '(r)easons straightway exercise reasons compelling encouraging exercise.' 9—10, 455. asserts provides means whereby driven astute new-found constitutional principles enunciated (here (1971)).' Post, 2710. statement—perhaps dissenter's license misconceives undervalues import Dur Clause. text, equate Pennsylvania. alone, recusal case; rather, critical factor, revealed us, character misbehavior dissent, course, differently, unavoidable disagreement.

Classification Label: 3