State v. Brantley
| Decision Date | 12 July 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 21951,21951 |
| Citation | 279 S.C. 215,305 S.E.2d 234 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. Clifford BRANTLEY, Appellant. |
Deputy Atty. Gen. C. Tolbert Goolsby, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen. Robert D. Cook and Joseph C. Coleman, Columbia, for appellant.
Staff Atty. Carolyn M. Adams, Columbia, and Sol. Randolph Murdaugh, Jr., Hampton, for respondent.
Appellant Clifford Brantley, Sheriff of Jasper County, was held in contempt of court for failure to appear and testify in Hampton County. Appellant asserts the trial court had no jurisdiction over him and thus lacked authority to hold him in contempt. We disagree and affirm.
The trial judge was presiding over a guilty plea proceeding in Hampton County. Upon being advised the defendant had records in Jasper County, the judge asked the solicitor's office to notify Sheriff Brantley to appear in court with the records at 2:30 that afternoon.
The sheriff chose not to appear, but sent a deputy with the requested records. The trial judge told the deputy he wanted Sheriff Brantley's presence immediately, but when the sheriff could not be found, he instructed the deputy to "pass the word along to Sheriff Brantley that I want him in court tomorrow morning by 9:30 without fail." The sheriff again failed to appear, explaining later he was busy investigating a shooting. After a full hearing on the merits, the trial court adjudged him in contempt for wilfully and unlawfully failing to obey a court order.
State, ex rel. McLeod v. Hite, 272 S.C. 303, 305, 251 S.E.2d 746, 747 (1979), quoting Ex Parte Robinson, 19 Wall. 505, 510, 86 U.S. 505, 22 L.Ed. 205, 207.
A trial court has the inherent " 'power to protect itself from indignities and to enable it effectively to administer its judicial functions.' " State, ex rel. McLeod v. Hite, supra, at page 306, 251 S.E.2d 746; State v. Weinberg, 229 S.C. 286, 92 S.E.2d 842 (1956).
Appellant contends the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the trial court ordered the sheriff to appear ex parte, did not issue a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum, and because he was sheriff in an adjoining county rather than the county where court was being held.
We find these contentions are without merit. Appellant concedes he had actual notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be heard. Moreover, since deputies are authorized agents of sheriffs, appellant waived any jurisdictional objection by sending his deputy. Willis, et al. v. Aiken County, 203 S.C. 96, 26 S.E.2d 313 (1943).
We hold when the subpoena serves "no purpose other than as a notice to appear" and the appellant admits he received the notice to appear on three occasions, he was in contempt of court in failing to comply. The court's order was valid, was directed to appellant in his official capacity as an officer of the court, and his wilful failure to comply constituted a constructive contempt of court, which tended to "obstruct and embarrass or prevent the due administration of justice." Long v. McMillan, et al., 226 S.C. 598, 609, 86 S.E.2d 477 (1955).
AFFIRMED.
The Sheriff of Jasper County disregarded an oral request to appear in General Sessions Court for Hampton County. The trial judge was preparing to sentence the son of one of the judge's best friends. They, like the judge and sheriff, were also residents of Jasper County. While I do not commend the sheriff's conduct, I believe the trial judge overreacted when he adjudged the sheriff in contempt of court. A subpoena for the sheriff's appearance should have been served if his failure to appear would trigger contempt proceedings.
The majority states appellant waived any jurisdictional defect and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stone v. Reddix-Smalls
...288 (1985). The court's power includes the ability to maintain order and decorum. State v. Weinburg, supra; see also State v. Brantley, 279 S.C. 215, 305 S.E.2d 234 (1983). The record indicates Judge Stone did not abuse her discretion in holding respondent in contempt for her exhibition of ......