Spruell v. State
| Decision Date | 14 November 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 56775,56775 |
| Parties | SPRUELL v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
William V. Hall, Jr., Decatur, for appellant.
M. Randall Peek, Dist. Atty., J. Wayne Moulton, Decatur, for appellee.
When this matter previously appeared before this court, it was remanded for specific findings of fact and conclusions of law. See Spruell v. State, 145 Ga.App. 720, 244 S.E.2d 636 (1978). Attorney Spruell brings this appeal from the trial court's order finding him guilty of contempt and from the denial of his motion to be tried publicly for contempt before any superior court judge other than Judge Clyde W. Henley.
1. "A trial judge may, for a direct criminal contempt committed in the presence of the court, hold the offender in contempt without a hearing and impose punishment, acting on his own knowledge of the facts . . . Brown v. Hames, 131 Ga.App. 148, 205 S.E.2d 716 (1974)." Spruell v. State, supra.
Appellant was representing a defendant in a criminal case and objected to the court's jury charge on entrapment. Mr. Spruell: The Court: "All right, sir." Mr. Spruell: The Court: "State your other objection." Mr. Spruell: The court then refused Spruell's request to read the statutory definition of entrapment. After a recess, the jury requested clarification of the definition of a crime and of entrapment. The trial judge recharged the jury on entrapment by reading the definition from the Code and redefined "a crime" for them. Mr. Spruell then questioned the court's charge that the date alleged in the indictment was not a material averment to the charge. The court overruled his motion for a recharge and requested that the court reporter read back the original remarks of the attorney in his objection to the court's charge on entrapment. After this statement was read back, the court ruled: "Mr. Spruell, due to your statements in your objections to charge and exceptions, you indicated that the Court purposely and with intention to deprive this defendant of his rights misstated the charge of the law to the jury and for that statement that you made, sir, I find you in contempt of court and I will deal with you after this case is over." At this point, the jury returned with a verdict of not guilty for appellant's client. After the jury was excused, the court again addressed the attorney: Mr. Spruell denied having been knowingly in contempt of court and asked to be given an opportunity to retain counsel and to have a hearing on intent. The court replied that he had already been held in contempt, but agreed to withhold sentence until he could confer with ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crane, In re
...400 U.S. 455, 91 S.Ct. 499, 27 L.Ed.2d 532 (1971); Daniel, Ga.Crim.Trial Practice (2d ed.) § 27-4, p. 682; Spruell v. State, 148 Ga.App. 99(1), 250 S.E.2d 807 (1978). "Judges should disqualify themselves in proceedings in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including bu......
-
Baptiste v. State
...State, 250 Ga. 664, 665(2), 300 S.E.2d 685 (1983); Jarrard v. State, 163 Ga.App. 99, 101(3), 292 S.E.2d 488 (1982); Spruell v. State, 148 Ga.App. 99(1), 250 S.E.2d 807 (1978). " 'Knowingly,' 'knowledge,' 'known,' or 'knows' denotes actual knowledge of the fact in question. A person's knowle......
-
Spruell, In re, A91A0201
...preservation of order and decorum in the Court, etc., is exempt from the due process requirements of notice and hearing. Spruell v. The State, 148 Ga.App. 99 (1978). It is not an abuse of the trial court's discretion in refusing to allow a defendant a hearing under such circumstances. Such ......
-
Shafer, In re, A94A2187
...Garland v. State, 101 Ga.App. 395, 114 S.E.2d 176 (1960); Spruell v. State, 145 Ga.App. 720, 244 S.E.2d 636 (1978); Spruell v. State, 148 Ga.App. 99, 250 S.E.2d 807 (1978); Jordan v. Hodges, 162 Ga.App. 473, 291 S.E.2d 778 The majority holds that a reviewable record of the events cannot be ......