In June 2022, Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Judge Roxanne E. Covington was holding a hearing on a motion to suppress evidence in Marquis McClain's criminal case.
asserted
Covington → hold → case
Seated in the gallery of the courtroom was McClain's acquaintance, Basile Outlaw.
asserted
acquaintance → seat → courtroom
After Judge Covington announced that she would be denying McClain's suppression motion, Outlaw stood up and said "the judge is a cocksucker" loud enough for Judge Covington to hear.
asserted
Covington → announce → motion
Judge Covington responded, "What did you say?"
asserted
you → respond → What
Outlaw replied: "Never mind.
asserted
Outlaw → reply → ?
I'm leaving."
asserted
I → leave → ?
Outlaw then exited the courtroom.
asserted
Outlaw → exit → courtroom
A deputy sheriff and a court employee began searching the building for Outlaw.
asserted
sheriff → begin → Outlaw
The trial court recessed the suppression matter to allow McClain's defense attorney to confer with his client in the wake of the court's suppression ruling.
asserted
attorney → recess → ruling
The court subsequently adjourned, but Judge Covington asked McClain's attorney to "stick around for another moment … just in case."
asserted
Covington → adjourn → case
Around this time, Outlaw came back to the courtroom on his own, at which time he was taken into custody for direct criminal contempt.
asserted
he → come → contempt
Outlaw was tried and sentenced "to fifteen to thirty days' incarceration"; he served thirty days.
asserted
he → try → days
But the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the conviction:
asserted
Court → reverse → conviction
A conviction under that Subsection "requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) of misconduct, (2) in the presence of the court, (3) committed with the intent to obstruct the proceedings, (4) which obstructs the administration of justice."
asserted
which → require → justice
This Court has held that, "[f]or conduct to constitute an obstruction of the administration of justice, it must significantly disrupt judicial proceedings."
asserted
it → hold → proceedings
This means that "[r]emarks that are injudicious, or even disrespectful, will not, without more, justify a summary conviction for contempt of court."
asserted
that → mean → court
To illustrate these principles, consider Williams v. Williams, where a pro se attorney in a custody dispute reacted injudiciously to a trial judge's evidentiary ruling:
asserted
attorney → illustrate → ruling
The Court: Objection is sustained.
asserted
Objection → sustain → Court
I heard him say that you are such a fucking asshole.
asserted
you → hear → ?
I heard it as an officer of the court.
asserted
I → hear → court
And the stenographer is nodding her head.
asserted
stenographer → nod → head
That's exactly what he said, "He is such a fucking asshole."
asserted
He → say → what
And he said it under his breath.
asserted
he → say → breath
And as an officer of the court, I am standing here, and I am testifying that that's exactly what he said.
asserted
he → stand → what
The trial court held Williams in contempt.
asserted
Williams → hold → contempt
On appeal, however, this Court held that Williams' remark did not obstruct the administration of justice because, although "there was a momentary break in the proceedings" due to Williams' comment, "the hearing resumed quickly," "[t]he entire incident encompassed just three and a half pages of hearing transcript," and "[s]uch a transient delay is not an obstruction of justice."
asserted
delay → hold → justice
Expounding upon the statutory requirement that the contemnor must "obstruct[t] the administration of justice," we explicitly stated that "[i]nappropriate and even ill-mannered conduct which does not obstruct or delay the trial falls short of the misbehavior punishable under 42 Pa.C.S. § 4132(3)."
asserted
which → expound → §
Consistent with Williams is Behr v. Behr, where a pro se litigant brought to family court a box of documents that had the word "DEATH" scrawled on it in faint orange highlighter.
asserted
that → bring → highlighter
The box remained under the litigant's table for the entire hearing, and only after the proceeding concluded did anyone notice it.
asserted
anyone → remain → it
The trial court held the litigant in contempt, but this Court reversed, concluding that the litigant's conduct did not significantly disrupt the judicial proceeding.
asserted
conduct → hold → proceeding
We also rejected the trial court's suggestion that a significant disruption occurred when the presence of the box triggered an investigation and subsequent contempt hearing.
asserted
presence → reject → investigation
We called this "circular reasoning" because, if we accepted the argument, it would mean that "any time a court reconvenes a hearing to investigate alleged misconduct, the alleged contemnor has automatically obstructed the administration of justice."
asserted
contemnor → call → justice
The insult that Outlaw directed at the court here ("the judge is a cocksucker") is offensive in a manner similar to the remark made in Williams ("He's such a fucking asshole.").
asserted
He → direct → Williams
Both comments fall well below the expected standard of courtroom decorum, and both contemnors made their comments in response to judicial rulings with which they disagreed.
asserted
they → fall → which
Furthermore, the delay to the proceedings in this case was limited to the judge asking Outlaw "What did you say?", followed by Outlaw responding "Never mind.
asserted
Outlaw → limit → What
I'm leaving."
asserted
I → leave → ?
This is the exact sort of "transient delay" or "momentary break in the proceedings" that we held in Williams cannot serve as the basis for a conviction under Subsection 4132(3).
asserted
we → hold → Subsection
…
[A]t common law, judges had broad authority to impose contempt for insulting remarks that undermine the court's authority with the public.
asserted
that → have → public
This sweeping authority continued to be enforced well into the twentieth century.
asserted
authority → continue → century
In Appeal of Levine (Pa. 1953), for example, we affirmed the contempt conviction of a District Attorney who responded to a scheduling misunderstanding by saying to a trial judge: "that's the way with this court, always mixing things up; everything is set on one day."
asserted
everything → affirm → day
…and 19 more, not listed.
The Aporia