Contempt is Not a Crime, Revisited
by: Ryan • December 19, 2012 • no comments
Today's batch of COA opinions included this paragraph:
Defendant also argues that the trial court plainly erred in entering "convictions" for contempt, because contempt is not a crime. See State v. Campbell, 246 Or App 683, 267 P3d 205 (2011) (accepting state's concession that contempt is not a crime and that the court erred in entering a conviction for contempt). The state disputes that characterization of the judgment, which is not titled as a conviction but does refer to defendant being "convicted" of the three counts. As the state points out, we need not address that issue because the trial court will be able to easily correct the judgment on remand so that it does not refer in any way to defendant being "convicted."
The LoD has talked about this before, including this thorough discussion by Erik Blumenthal.
The time to resolve the issue is not at the COA. It's before the charge is adjudicated. It's when the complaint itself either expressly or implicitly indicates a criminal charge. (The complaint might say "u-misdemeanor" for example, or depending on your county, have a criminal case #.) So merely fixing the judgment in the above case may very well be inadequate. Anything that indicates the charge is criminal, from complaint to judgment, needs to be addressed and eliminated before it can do any more damage to the defendant. If the complaint suggests a crime, move to dismiss for failure to state a crime, since, self-evidently, an allegation of contempt is insufficient to allege a crime.
Are you listening Clackamas County? Washington County?
