Farmer v. Holton

• Decision Date: 26 May 1978
• Docket Number: 55581,Nos. 55580,s. 55580
• Citation: Farmer v. Holton, 146 Ga.App. 102, 245 S.E.2d 457 (Ga. App. 1978)
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: FARMER v. HOLTON (two cases).

Page 457

245 S.E.2d 457

146 Ga.App. 102

FARMER v.HOLTON (two cases).

Nos. 55580, 55581.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Argued April 5, 1978.

Decided May 4, 1978.

Rehearing Denied May 26, 1978.

John R. Myer, Atlanta, for appellant.

Dewey Hayes, Dist. Atty., for appellee.

WEBB, Judge.

During the course of the retrial as to sentence of one George Street who had been convicted of murder and armed robbery, ¹ attorney Millard Farmer, who at the retrial was counsel for the convicted murderer, was twice adjudged by the trial judge to be guilty of direct criminal contempt of the court.On one contempt charge the sentence was one day in the common jail and on the other the sentence was three days.We find no merit in any of the grounds argued in Farmer's two appeals, and affirm the judgments of conviction.

First Contempt

The trial court adjudged Farmer in direct criminal contempt on September 14, 1977 and sentenced him to confinement for 24 hours in the common jail for contemptuous conduct occurring on that date.The court in its order recited that from the very beginning of the hearings in the sentencing aspect of the Street murder case, the contemnor had interrupted the court while the court ruled on objections and motions, had refused to obey the ruling of the court, had disrupted the proceedings of the court, had refused to allow the court to continue in an orderly manner with the business before it, and had "continually demonstrated, by way of demeanor and words, his contempt for the orderly processes of this court."The order quoted as contemptible conduct by Farmer the following occurrence during the cross examination of the convicted felon, George Street, by the assistant district attorney, M. C. Pritchard: "Q.When did this take place, George?Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I object to I don't mean to harass Mr. Pritchard too awful much, but we will refer to our client George Street by his first name, because that's an affectionate way that we feel about him.And, we've known him a period of time.But, we would insist that when he is referred to by the prosecutors that he be referred to as Mr. . . .Mr. Pritchard: In other words, . . . The Court: I will not direct you to do that.Q.Do you have any objection to me calling you George?Mr. Farmer: Yes, sir, Your Honor, I object to his objection is from us.It is a demeaning thing for you to call black people by their first name and to call white people Mr. We're not going to have a double standard.We're not going to be part of it.And, we're not going to have it.The Court: Objection overruled.You may ask the question.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, it's a form of discrimination.The Court: The objection is overruled.The objection is noted in the record.Q. George, when did Mr. Strickland . . . Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, I object again to him calling my client George.We have stated repeatedly.He has used the term colored folks and he referred to yesterday them.He said, 'I'll call them whatever they want to be called.'All of those things are racial slurs.This prosecutor is a racist.And, we've got to prevent it from coming through to the jury.We've got to prevent it from coming through to the Court at every state.We resent the fact that he is referring to the client as Mr. We have been through this situation in this State in which a trial judge allowed and told prosecutors and District Attorneys not to call black people Mr. in his Court.That's got to stop in this State if black people are to have equal justice.And, it can't stop if objection is not made to it at a proper time.If he is to address this individual he will address him as he addresses every other witness.He is not his friend.He is trying to have him electrocuted.And, he should address him as Mr. And, I object most strenuously to him using this term and it's being used in a derogatory and a discriminatory way, just as he was using colored and them and they and those kind of terms.They're all derogatory, racial slurs.The Court: Objection overruled.Q. George, when did . . . Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, I object to him referring to our client . . . Mr. Pritchard: . . . Mr. Farmer: . . . by any name . . . The Court: Don't get up . . . Mr. Farmer: . . . at all.The Court: Have a seat.Mr. Sheriff?Sheriff: Yes, sir.The Court: Sit this gentleman down by the name of Mr. Farmer.Don't make that objection again.I will let you have it as a continuing objection throughout the trial.Mr. Farmer: May we be heard?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: May we put up evidence?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may we argue this motion?The Court: No, sir.It's already been argued all the Court is going to hear it.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I . . . The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: May I have time to prepare a motion?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I prepare a motion?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: May I make an offer of proof?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: May I confer with my client?The Court: Not at this point, no sir.Mr. Farmer: May I advise . . . The Court: Your client is on the stand just like . . . Mr. Farmer: . . . my client regarding his rights?The Court: . . . Don't interrupt the Court.Your client is on the stand.You put him on the stand just like any other witness.He will be treated just like any other witness.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, I . . . The Court: No better or no worse.Mr. Farmer: I didn't put him on the stand to have him discriminated against.The Court: Overruled.Now, don't make that objection again.You have a continuing objection.I mean about the calling him by the name of George.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, do you object to me calling you Elie?The Court: Mr. Farmer, do not ask the Court any such question as that.That is a direct confront of the Court of its authority.If you do that again I will consider it as a contempt of this Court.Mr. Farmer: What, Your Honor, may I ask the Court.I want to inquire . . . The Court: You are to be quiet at this point and we're going to proceed with the cross examination.Mr. Farmer: When may I make an objection?The Court: Are you going to allow us to proceed with the cross examination of this witness?Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, I feel like in representing my client . . . The Court: Mr. Farmer, this Court finds your continual interruption of the Court, your refusal to allow us to continue with examination of this witness to be in contempt of the Court.This Court so finds you in contempt of Court.It is the judgment of the Court that you are in contempt of Court.It's the judgment of the Court that you be sentenced to the common jail of this county for a period of 24 hours.Mr. Sheriff?"

Second Contempt

The second judgment for a direct criminal contempt by Farmer was eight days later, September 22, for his refusal to abide by the rulings of the court by persisting in a line of questioning which the court had repeatedly ruled impermissible, and in attributing improper motives to the court's rulings.Farmer made a direct verbal assault on the court, according to the citation for contempt, by charging it with malicious and arbitrary reasoning in its rulings.Attached as an exhibit to the court's order was a 23-page transcript, consisting in the most part of rambling and often obfuscatory attempts by attorney Farmer to establish that racial prejudice and discrimination had been exhibited by the judge and the prosecution during jury selection, which culminated in the following pertinent exchange: "The Court: . . . Now, we'll deal with this juror situation when they come up.That will go to probably go to qualifications of that juror.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, the reason that we wanted to deal with it at this time is to point out to the Court, is that here are things that we are being able to show you and show the Court that's happening.We are not able to find out about everything that happens.We are only able to, I'm sure, know a very, very small part of what is happening.And, the Court has got to take corrective action and the Court has got to deal with this in a way that we've previously suggested in order that it will not happen.And, the Court has got to allow us to inquire into what the Court before lunch and previously wants to cover up.And, that is the racism that exists that's affecting these jurors and affecting Your Honor . . . Mr. Hayes: Your Honor, the State objects to the improper malicious argument he's making on the Court.The Court: All right, Mr. Farmer, the statement that the Court wants to cover it up is a direct contempt of this Court, knowingly made by you.I have repeatedly warned you about this.Again you have sought to make that statement.The Court finds you in contempt of Court, sir, again.The Court sentences you to 3 days in the county jail, ser . . . Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I be . . . The Court: . . . service to begin at the termination of this case.That's all.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I be heard on this?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I have counsel to represent me and present evidence on this issue?The Court: No, sir.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I for the purpose of here forward understand what can be my role in representing Mr. Street as far as bringing out the reason that I feel that he is being denied a fair trial.I don't understand, Your Honor?The Court: You'll have to exercise your discretion and your knowledge as an attorney.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, . . . The Court: That's all.Mr. Farmer: Your Honor, may I . . . The Court: No, sir, we're through with that discussion.All right, call the next juror, Mr. Clerk."

1.The power to punish for contempt is inherent in every court of record, and under Code Ann. § 24-104, every court has power to punish for contempt committed in its immediate presence.Plunkett v. Hamilton, 136 Ga. 72(1), 70 S.E. 781(1911)."We start with the premise that the right of courts to conduct their business in an untrammeled way...