Russell v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Presiding Judge.
Charles M. Russell, an attorney, brings this appeal from his conviction for direct (criminal) contempt which occurred during his representation at trial of an accused criminal. Russell's summary conviction was based on an improper remark directed to the deputy prosecuting attorney in the presence of the trial judge and jury. He contends the court erred 1) in finding his conduct contemptuous; 2) in making a nunc pro tunc entry subsequent to his conviction which materially altered the grounds therefor (from merely uttering rude language to shouting it), thus denying him…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Craig v. HarneySupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Brown v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- In Re McConnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- In Re LittleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Eaton v. City of TulsaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Direct Contempt of CaitoIndiana Supreme Court · 1984
- Taylor v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1982
- Hopping v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1994
- MacOn v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1994
- C.F. v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.