PDA

View Full Version : Judge orders civil contempt hearing for Arizona lawman Arpaio



mick silver
13th February 2015, 04:19 AM
By David Schwartz http://news.yahoo.com/judge-orders-civil-contempt-hearing-arizona-lawman-arpaio-012025717.html



PHOENIX (Reuters) - Controversial Arizona lawman Joe Arpaio and his top lieutenants will face a civil contempt-of-court hearing in April for repeatedly ignoring judicial orders arising from a 2007 racial-profiling case, a federal judge ruled on Thursday.
U.S. District Court Judge Murray Snow ordered the evidentiary hearing to be conducted after determining there was sufficient evidence to move ahead with the proceeding that could result in penalties against Arpaio, four other individuals, and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.
"After an appropriate hearing, the Court will determine whether these individuals have committed contempt of court and the sanctions for any such violations," Snow's order read.
Arpaio, 82, who bills himself as "America's Toughest Sheriff," could face fines or jail time along with other current and former officials cited in the ruling.
Snow, who had become increasingly frustrated with the sheriff and his office, set the hearing to take place April 21-24 in a federal courtroom in Phoenix.
A lawyer for Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office could not be immediately reached for comment.
The judge found in 2013 that Arpaio and his deputies racially profiled Latino drivers during traffic stops and unreasonably detained them, violating their constitutional rights, in a ruling that was a major blow to the six-term sheriff.
Snow installed a court monitor to oversee the operations of Arpaio's office and ordered that changes be made to help ensure there is no repeat of the offenses.
Arpaio, who has said he will run for a seventh term, has appealed the ruling and denied that his office was guilty of racial profiling.
In the latest ruling, Snow said attorneys for the Latino drivers had shown "sufficient evidence" to warrant the contempt hearing on a range of grounds, including failing to stop immigration enforcement operations as ordered by the court.
Also cited was an alleged failure by the sheriff's office to turn over evidence to the other side's lawyers during the trial.
Snow ordered Arpaio to appear before the court along with Chief Deputy Gerald Sheridan, retired Executive Chief Brian Sands, Deputy Chief John MacIntyre, and Lieutenant Joseph Sousa.
Cecillia Wang, an attorney for the plaintiffs and director of the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants' Rights Project, said there already is "abundant evidence" of Arpaio and his deputies violating the court's orders.
"No doubt we will see even more evidence develop during the evidentiary hearing in April," Wang said. "It is well past time for the sheriff's recalcitrance to end."
(Editing by Daniel Wallis and Eric Walsh)


Crime & Justice
Society & Culture
Joe Arpaio
evidentiary hearing
Maricopa County Sheriff
contempt of court

Click to view comments 
View Comments (1941)

Spectrism
13th February 2015, 05:27 AM
So if there was an illegal immigrant problem from Mexico, it was "unfair" for him to be looking closely at "latins". Maybe he should have spent more time looking for Swedes and Irish coming in from Mexico.

mick silver
13th February 2015, 11:36 AM
they have been trying to stop him for year now from doing his job , just more bullshit coming from more asshole judges

Glass
13th February 2015, 09:42 PM
So in my limited knowledge and something Guy Taylor said in one of his seminar presentations was that Contempt of Court is a Common Law jurisidiction, not a legal/civil one. There is no Contempt of Court for civil proceedings. So I find it interesting that this is a Civil Contempt Hearing when there doesn't appear to be such a thing.


An order for contempt of court can only stand legally if it meets all of the following requirements:

it orders a person to do or not do something that is lawful,
the person held in contempt knew of the order to do or not do a lawful thing,
the person was able to comply with the order, but
the person failed to comply with the order.

In U.S. civil courts such as those that hear personal injury and similar cases, courts typically recognize two different kinds of contempt: direct contempt and indirect contempt. Direct contempt occurs in the presence of the judge. In these cases, the judge will typically point out the misbehavior, explain that the person is in contempt, and give the person a chance to explain himself. The judge may then impose a sanction immediately.

Link (http://www.rotlaw.com/legal-library/what-does-it-mean-to-be-held-in-contempt-of-court/)

The term "lawful" denotes common law jurisdiction. If it said "legal" then it would be civil. Unless there is some magic code or suspension of law going on here, the Judge is in very dangerous waters. Arpaio has good people with him. Lets hope they grasp this pronto.

Can any one shed light on what the authority for this action is?

Glass
14th June 2015, 08:34 PM
Apario is asking for supporters to help him pay legal fees for the claims being leveled against him for apparently profiling illegal immigrants in traffic and immigration patrols.

He is currently facing 2 cases. One of which is being presided over by the husband (Judge Snow) of a woman Aparios lawyer investigated for some reason.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Lm_I4PJ3w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Lm_I4PJ3w

palani
15th June 2015, 04:37 AM
Can any one shed light on what the authority for this action is?
There is no contempt of court crime in common law.

In common law three judicial actors are required to make any sort of decision. A single judge can only determine the amount of bail, quell riots, or determine whether to release you on recognizance.

The contempt concept comes from Equity. This is the only power that a chancellor in equity has. Law and equity were merged in 1950's in the U.S. so a single judge might put on either hat without bothering to tell you about his decision. A good case to review is Hutches v Maxicenters http://privateaudio.homestead.com/CC_Hutchens_v._Maxicenters_541_SO2D_618-WL_-_HIGHLIGHTED.doc for a clue as to the thought processes of a judge when mentally flipping from law concepts to equitable concepts.

palani
15th June 2015, 04:39 AM
Apario is asking for supporters to help him pay legal fees for the claims being leveled against him

If he isn't up to the task of swatting down nuisance court actions without attorney representation then why believe he is competent to be sheriff?