DISTRICT COURT UPDATE
Summons Article, May, 2007
written by
Hon. M. Randall Jurrens

District  Court  Update

Enhancement of the court’s contempt power is the topic of this month’s update.

Apparently persuaded that a $250 fine and/or 30 days in jail was insufficient, the Michigan legislature recently amended MCL 600.1715(1) to enhance the maximum penalties for criminal contempt to $7,500 and/or 93 days in jail and/or probation; and this increased authority extends to district courts pursuant to MCL 600.8317.

As you may recall, courts invoke criminal contempt proceedings to punish a contemnor for doing a forbidden act; as distinguished from civil contempt which purposes to coerce the contemnor to do a commanded act (enforceable, pursuant to MCL 600.1715(2), by indefinite imprisonment until the contempt is purged by the required performance).

Exercise of the strengthened criminal contempt powers may play out in a number of ways, including defendants’ non-appearance or disruptive behavior, non-appearing or untruthful witnesses, bond violations, probation violations, and failure to comply with judgments or other orders of the court.

Perhaps of some comfort, the amended remedies for criminal contempt do not alter existing procedural requirements, including requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt and, when the contemptuous conduct is not committed in the court’s presence, a contemnor’s right to a formal hearing.

In any event, exercise of this newfound judicial muscle will presumably be tempered by the Supreme Court’s admonition that “[t]he power to punish for contempt is awesome and carries with it the equally great responsibility to apply it judiciously”.  People v Matish, 384 Mich 568 (1971).

#   #   #