In re Holt

The evidence supported the trial court's finding of contempt against an attorney who failed to appear at his client's scheduled criminal trial.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Greg W. Holt, an attorney, appeals the judgment of contempt entered against him when he failed to appear for trial on September 9 and 10, 2002, in Jones County Superior Court, for the case of State v. Ken Bishop , case number 2002-CR-18026 “Bishop case”. Holt alleges that the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s finding of contempt and that the punishment imposed was excessive. We find Holt’s arguments without merit and affirm. Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the Bishop case appeared on the September 9, 2002 trial calendar in the Superior Court of Jones County before the Honorable Hulane E. George. Subsequently, during the week of September 2, 2002, Holt received notice that several criminal cases for which he was attorney of record were scheduled for motions hearings in the State Court of Houston County on September 9, 10, and 11, 2002, before the Honorable Bob Richardson. Holt requested that the Houston County Solicitor reset the motions set for Monday morning, September 9, 2002, to the afternoon to allow him to appear in the Superior Court of Jones County for what he antipicated to be a plea in the Bishop case. The solicitor denied his request.

Holt faxed a conflict letter to Judge George in Jones County Superior Court. In such conflict letter he stated he would appear first in the Houston County State Court unless directed otherwise. However, this conflict letter was not faxed until 4:07 p.m. on September 6, 2002, the Friday before the Monday, September 9, 2002 calendar. On Monday, September 9, 2002, without contacting Judge George’s office, Holt appeared in Houston County State Court for the motion hearings. Around midday, Holt was informed by his office that Judge George’s office had called, directing him to appear in her court. Judge George stated on the record that her office informed Holt’s secretary that if Holt could not be in her court on Monday, he should be there Tuesday morning and that, if he failed to appear, he would be held in contempt.

In re Holt

The evidence supported the trial court's finding of contempt against an attorney who failed to appear at his client's scheduled criminal trial.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report