759
Indirect Versus Direct Contempt
| |
A contempt is indirect when it occurs out of the presence of the
court,
thereby requiring the court to rely on the testimony of third parties for
proof
of the offense. It is direct when it occurs under the court's own eye and
within
its own hearing. See Matter of Heathcock, 696 F.2d 1362,
1365
(11th Cir. 1983); United States v. Peterson, 456 F.2d 1135, 1139
(10th
Cir. 1972). The requirement that direct contempt be committed in the
presence
of the court does not limit direct contempts to those which take place in
the
courtroom, but some degree of formality usually found in the courtroom
setting
must accompany an exercise of the judicial function for the proceedings to
be in
the actual presence of the court. Matter of Jaffree, 741 F.2d 133
(7th
Cir. 1984). Direct contempt for conduct in the court's presence may be
punished
summarily. McGuire v. Sigma Coatings, Inc., 48 F.3d 902 (5th Cir.
1995).
[cited in USAM 9-39.000] | |