Legal Opinion

Templeton v. Hurtado

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 26, 1998No. 40705-8-IPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBecker, J.

Before imposing a sanction for direct contempt, a court must give the contemnor the opportunity to speak in mitigation of the contempt. Here, immediately upon finding the defendant in direct contempt for refusing to sign a no-contact order, the municipal court imposed a 30-day sentence. The court’s failure to give the defendant an opportunity to speak in mitigation requires reversal of the sentence and a remand for resentencing. Because the order of contempt does not recite the facts, entry of written findings is also required on remand.

FACTS

On March 24, 1997, Judge Michael Hurtado of King…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. HeadWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State v. HeadWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State v. HobbleWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  4. CONTEMPT IN STATE v. DewerthWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State Ex Rel. Dunn v. PleseWashington Supreme Court · 1925

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In re the Personal Restraint of BreedloveWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  2. In Re BreedloveWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State v. JordanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  4. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs. v. SimsWashington Supreme Court · 2019
  5. State Of Washington v. Jonathan DenningtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API