NCJ Number
100407
Journal
Canadian Journal of Criminology Volume: 28 Issue: 1 Dated: (January 1986) Pages: 31-45
Date Published
1986
Length
15 pages
Annotation
This analysis of Canadian case law focuses on the prosecution of defense counsel for contempt of court due to delays in conducting their clients' cases; the analysis also considers the implications of these prosecutions for the client's right to counsel.
Abstract
Judges generally regard continuances resulting from the defense counsel's failure to appear in court as a justification for a contempt citation. The case law has shown the existence of a variety of categories of contempt: civil, criminal, direct, and indirect. Hearings for contempt of court follow a separate procedure known as summary process. Lawyers charged with contempt have the right to answer and defend themselves. Tardiness, poor memory, an unvalidated illness, vacation, religious holiday, and a commitment in another court may all constitute contempt of< court. Factors crucial to the determination include the timing of efforts to resolve scheduling conflicts, the adequacy of the explanation, and whether or not the lawyer apologizes. The lawyer's intentions underlying the failure to appear are thus the crucial issue. However, the use of these contempt citations suggests to lawyers that they should refer cases elsewhere if they expect not to be able to appear in court on the date scheduled. As a result, the courts' concerns for efficiency and speed are limiting clients' right to legal representation. 42 reference notes.