State of Tennessee v. James Beeler
2012 Tenn. LEXIS 810
| Tenn. | 2012Background
- Beeler, a Tennessee attorney, was cited for criminal contempt for speaking to the opposing party’s client during a suppression hearing, allegedly in violation of Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
- The trial court found willful misbehavior under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-9-102(1)-(2) based on Beeler’s communication with a represented person and his purported disruption of the proceedings.
- Witness testimony and court colloquy showed Beeler and opposing counsel had cooperated on a joint defense, with prior discussions about communicating with each other’s clients.
- The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction, interpreting the record as supporting willful misbehavior primarily under § 29-9-102(1).
- This Court granted permission to appeal to determine whether a lawyer’s ethical-rule violation can amount to criminal contempt given the record.
- The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed, vacated the conviction, and concluded the evidence did not establish willful misbehavior beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Beeler's conduct amount to willful misbehavior under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-9-102(1)-(2)? | Beeler knowingly spoke to a represented person about the case. | Ethical cooperation with co-counsel and implied consent negate willful misbehavior. | No; evidence insufficient for willful misbehavior. |
| May an ethical violation of Rule 4.2 constitute criminal contempt if not shown as willful misbehavior? | Ethical breach should support contempt under the statute. | Ethical duty violations do not automatically equal contempt unless they obstruct justice. | Not automatically; conduct must show willful misbehavior obstructing justice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Black v. Blount, 938 S.W.2d 394 (Tenn. 1996) (contempt standard; presumption of innocence in contempt appeals)
- Ex parte Robinson, 86 U.S. (19 Wall.) 505 (U.S. 1873) (ethical misconduct not automatically contemptuous; historical context)
- In re Sneed, 302 S.W.3d 825 (Tenn. 2010) (willful violation of court order; applicability to contempt)
- Konvalinka v. Chattanooga-Hamilton Cnty. Hosp. Auth., 249 S.W.3d 346 (Tenn. 2008) (civil contempt; willful violation of court order)
- Robinson v. Air Draulics Eng’g Co., 377 S.W.2d 908 (Tenn. 1964) (contempt standard and appellate review)
- State v. Turner, 914 S.W.2d 951 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995) (summary contempt procedure; due process safeguards)