Pounders v. Watson, 521 U.S. 982, 8 (1997) (per curiam)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Cite as: 521 U. S. 982 (1997)

Per Curiam

did here, summary contempt must be available to vindicate the authority of the court . . . ." Id., at 316. Even the dissent suggested contempt convictions would have been warranted if the witnesses had engaged in " 'insolent tactics.' " Id., at 326 (Brennan, J., dissenting) (quoting Harris, supra, at 165).

In this case the state trial court made an express finding that respondent willfully refused to comply with the court's order. Again and again the trial court admonished counsel, both in open court and at bench conferences when respondent was sitting a few feet away, not to discuss punishment. After respondent asked her client whether he had been facing the death penalty, the court sustained an objection and said: " 'We've already talked about this at side bar. Follow the Court's admonitions.' " App. to Pet. for Cert. 24. Undaunted, respondent's next question was, " 'You're facing life without possibility of parole?' " Id., at 25.

The Court of Appeals did not question the willfulness finding in its opinion. 102 F. 3d, at 438 ("[W]e do not decide the issue whether Ms. Watson willfully disobeyed a court order"). Instead, the Court of Appeals held her conduct was not sufficiently disruptive because she herself "did not engage in a pattern of repeated violations that pervaded the courtroom and threatened the dignity of the court" and because the record did not indicate she would have repeated the references to punishment unless she were held in summary contempt. Ibid.

All that is before us is the ruling that respondent's conduct was not disruptive enough to justify contempt, and on this issue we are in disagreement with the Court of Appeals. Nothing in our cases supports a requirement that a contemnor "engage in a pattern of repeated violations that pervaded the courtroom," ibid., before she may be held in summary contempt. To the contrary, in Wilson, the summary contempt convictions were upheld after a single refusal to give immunized testimony, "not delivered disrespectfully." 421

989

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007