Legal Opinion
In Re Gratehouse
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 3, 1980No. 79-544PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellant is an attorney who was representing a defendant in an on-going criminal proceeding. He seeks reversal of his conviction of contempt for failure to make a timely appearance before the Superior Court. He argues (1) that the evidence was insufficient to show that his conduct was willful, deliberate, or reckless, and (2) that the court erred in disposing of his case summarily under Super.Ct.Cr.R. 42(a), rather than following the Rule 42(b) procedures for disposition by another judge upon notice and hearing. Finding these arguments unpersuasive, we affirm.
The record reflects the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. FordSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Matter of HuntDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
- Appeal of GregoryDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
- In Re RosenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1974
- Matter of DenneyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1977
3Cited by12 opinions
- Swisher v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Matter of ThompsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Williams v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Matter of MarshallDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- In the Matter of SiracusaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.