729 S.E.2d 734
Va. Ct. App.2012Background
- Parham appeared pro se at a JDR court hearing in a child custody case.
- The JDR court found her guilty of summary contempt without a court reporter recording the hearing.
- The JDR court filed a certificate under Code § 18.2-459 describing the conviction and circumstances.
- Parham balled up the summons papers in court and later balled up the custody orders after a recess, claiming she disagreed with the rulings.
- Parham appealed to the circuit court, which affirmed the JDR finding; Parham testified in her defense.
- The appellate issues concern (i) sufficiency of the evidence for contempt and (ii) the admissibility/confrontation issue regarding the JDR certificate under § 18.2-459.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for direct contempt | Parham argues the conduct did not constitute misbehavior in presence of court. | Commonwealthmaintains conduct was contemptuous in open court. | Evidence supported misbehavior in presence of court under § 18.2-456(1). |
| Admissibility of JDR certificate and confrontation issue | Parham claims due process requires confrontation of JDR judge. | Certificate admissible; no Sixth Amendment confrontation right in summary contempt. | Circuit court did not violate due process by admitting the § 18.2-459 certificate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Carter’s Case, 96 Va. 791 (1899) (inherent contempt power and dignity of the court)
- Potts v. Commonwealth, 184 Va. 855 (1946) (contempt includes acts hindering court; direct contempt)
- Robinson v. Commonwealth, 41 Va. App. 137 (2003) (misbehavior in presence of court under § 18.2-456(1))
- In re Savin, 131 U.S. 267 (1889) (misbehavior in presence of court may not obstruct justice; summary contempt allowed)
- United Mine Workers v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821 (1994) (due process protections differ for serious contempts; right to jury trial)