Garlin v. State, 1--974A134
Decision Date | 10 April 1975 |
Docket Number | No. 1--974A134,1--974A134 |
Parties | Zeral GARLIN, 1 Appellant (Defendant below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below). |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
White & White, Covington, Ronald E. Elberger, Indianapolis, for appellant.
Theodore L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., Harry John Watson, III, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.
LYBROOK Judge.
Defendant-appellant Garlin appeals from convictions on two counts of contempt of court challenging, inter alia, whether the procedure followed by the trial court violated basic procedural due process requirements. We reverse.
The record reveals that Garlin was convicted on two contempt charges which arose from his conduct while serving as a member of a petit jury in the Fountain Circuit Court. Despite the fact that at least one of the charges constituted indirect criminal contempt, the trial court proceeded to charge, try, convict, and fine Garlin without (1) requiring the filing of a verified information, (2) serving upon Garlin a rule to show cause, and (3) granting a change of judge, all of which are required by IC 1971, 34--4--7--8 (Burns Code Ed.) and IC 1971, 34--4--8--1 (Burns Code Ed.) in indirect criminal contempt proceedings. Nevertheless, the State urges that despite the failure to comply with statutory guidelines, Garlin's constitutional due process rights were not violated.
The question of what 'due process of law' encompasses in criminal contempt proceedings was discussed by the United States Supreme Court in In re Oliver (1948), 333 U.S. 257, 68 S.Ct. 499, 92 L.Ed. 682. Therein, the court relied upon Cooke v. United States (1925), 267 U.S. 517, 45 S.Ct. 390, 69 L.Ed. 767, and stated:
2 ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Skolnick v. State, PS
...effect, the "notice" required by due process. I read Brennan v. State (1961) 242 Ind. 79, 173 N.E.2d 312, and Garlin v. State (1st Dist. 1975) 163 Ind.App. 570, 325 N.E.2d 515 to so hold. See also State ex rel. Allen v. Vermillion Circuit Court (1967) 248 Ind. 258, 226 N.E.2d 324, and McWhi......
-
Marriage of Neiswinger, In re
...LaGrange v. State, (1958) 238 Ind. 689, 153 N.E.2d 593; Boggs v. State, (1979) 179 Ind.App. 607, 386 N.E.2d 992; Garlin v. State, (1975) 163 Ind.App. 570, 325 N.E.2d 515; People v. Randall, (1980) 89 Ill.App.3d 406, 44 Ill.Dec. 651, 411 N.E.2d 1017. Although the Court of Appeals correctly c......
-
Marriage of Neiswinger, In re
...an opportunity to answer the charge and defend his behavior before judgment is imposed. In re Oliver, supra; Garlin v. State, (1975) 163 Ind.App. 570, 325 N.E.2d 515. The procedure set out in IND.CODE 34-4-7-8 is appropriate here, omitting the last sentence addressed to indirect The stateme......
-
Boggs v. State
...a panel from which a special judge should have been named to hear the action against Boggs. 1 In the case of Garlin v. State (1975), 163 Ind.App. 570, 325 N.E.2d 515, this court reversed a conviction of contempt where the procedure followed by the trial court violated basic procedural due p......