State v. Adams, 2014 Ohio 2728

Steven Adams, a defense attorney, represented Amanda Pate in a DUI matter in Hamilton County Municipal Court and argued at a motion-to-suppress hearing on July 31, 2013.
During the hearing Adams and city prosecutor Melanie Reising exchanged heated, personal comments about suspension of Pate’s driving privileges; the judge admonished counsel and later reviewed the transcript.
The trial judge held an on-the-record in-chambers discussion and then scheduled an August 23, 2013 hearing described as a conduct hearing; Adams objected to the court’s authority to hold such a hearing.
At the August 23 hearing the court characterized Adams’s courtroom demeanor as loud, aggressive, and lacking civility, and found him in direct contempt under R.C. 2705.01.
The court sentenced Adams to 30 days in jail and a $250 fine, but allowed him to “purge” the contempt by apologizing to the court and the prosecutor by a set date; the purge deadline passed, and Adams appealed.
The appellate court concluded the contempt was criminal in nature, required proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and determined the record did not show direct criminal contempt beyond a reasonable doubt; the contempt order was vacated.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court properly found Adams in direct contempt under R.C. 2705.01	Court (prosecution) argued Adams’s loud, aggressive, disrespectful behavior in the judge’s presence obstructed court’s administration and warranted summary punishment	Adams argued the conduct did not meet the standard for direct contempt; the court lacked authority to hold a separate “conduct” hearing and his remarks were not an immediate threat to court order	Court of Appeals held the record did not show direct criminal contempt beyond a reasonable doubt; trial court abused its discretion and contempt order vacated
Whether the contempt order was final and appealable despite a purge condition	Prosecution implicitly treated the order as punitive and final because the purge condition (apology) did not seek compliance with an existing court order	Adams argued purge condition rendered the order nonfinal and unappealable	Appellate court found the apology purge was punitive and, because the purge deadline had passed, the contempt order was final and appealable

State v. Kilbane, 61 Ohio St.2d 201 (criminal vs. civil contempt distinction and review for abuse of discretion)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (standard for abuse of discretion)
In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257 (requirements for summary punishment for direct contempt)
Brown v. Executive 200, Inc., 64 Ohio St.2d 250 (criminal contempt standard requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt)
State ex rel. Doe v. Tracy, 51 Ohio App.3d 198 (finality and appealability of contempt orders require finding plus sanction)