Legal Opinion
In re Marshall
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided October 17, 1983No. 82-1206PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellant, an attorney, was adjudicated to be in contempt of court for failing to comply with an order directing him to represent a parent in a child neglect action. On direct appeal we affirmed the judgment of conviction, In re Marshall, 445 A.2d 5 (D.C.1982). Thereafter, he collaterally attacked the conviction in the trial court on the ground that Corporation Counsel’s involvement in the contempt proceedings deprived the court of jurisdiction to act. Upon denial of relief, this appeal followed. We affirm.
As indicated in our previous opinion, id. at 6, appellant, upon application of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- District of Columbia v. SmithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1974
- Matter of MarshallDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- District of Columbia v. AckermanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Mullowny v. MowattCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1915
3Cited by5 opinions
- In re A.M.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- Johnson v. Capital City Mortgage Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- PELOTE v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
- Michael Anthony Crockett v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- In Re AMDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991