Friday, Sept. 5, 2003 | 11:20 a.m.
A woman charged with attempted battery was told she would spend an extra five months in jail for arguing with a judge, despite laws that limit contempt punishment to 25 days in jail or a maximum $500 fine.
District Judge Kathy Hardcastle held Quenya Hulett, 29, of Las Vegas in contempt of court Aug. 28 when Hulett became argumentative after her case was delayed, according to Michael Sommermeyer, spokesman for the Clark County District Court.
Hardcastle ordered Hulett to spend 150 days in jail, citing her for contempt six times. Sommermeyer said it was an unusually long sentence for contempt of court. Most contempt sentences last a few hours to a couple of days, he said.
"It's a warning," Sommermeyer said. "Usually people heed the warning."
Both District Attorney David Roger and Public Defender Marcus Cooper said they thought the sentence was long.
"It does sound extremely harsh," Cooper said.
Chief Public Defender Robert Thompson said this morning that he expected the contempt charges to be dismissed next week when Hulett appears again in court. He said negotiations had resulted in an understanding between his office, the district attorney's office and the judges involved.
A judge's power to hold defendants in contempt is limited to sentencing a defendant to a $500 fine or up to 25 days in jail, both officials said. Hardcastle also ordered the jail time to be served after any other jail time she may receive.
Because the case is still active, Hardcastle could not comment on the incident, Sommermeyer said.
Cooper and Roger said their staffs would work together to try to get some of Hulett's contempt charges dismissed the next time she appears in court.
But only the judge can change a contempt sentence, Roger said.
"That's the court's decision, not ours," he said.
This is not the first time a district judge's use of contempt of court has been questioned. In May three Clark County men accused District Judge Jessie Walsh of unfairly throwing them in jail for contempt.
The men were audience members in Walsh's court and were cited for talking too loudly. One man was held in contempt for talking in the hall and another for talking before the judge took the bench.
All three men complained to the American Civil Liberties Union, which said it would file complaints with the Judicial Disciplinary Commission. Once complaints have been filed with the commission, parties are prohibited from talking about them.
This is also not the first time Hardcastle's judicial decisions have been questioned. In August Hardcastle was criticized because she limited the number of victims who could speak at a defendant's sentencing, despite state law that allows all victims the opportunity to speak.
As a result Sandy Heverly, executive director of the nonprofit Stop DUI, said she planned to file a complaint against Hardcastle with the state Judicial Disciplinary Commission.
Hardcastle was handling Judge Jackie Glass' court calendar when Hulett was cited for contempt. Hulett is scheduled to appear before Glass Tuesday.
In audio transcripts of the Aug. 28 proceeding Hulett can be heard raising her voice to Hardcastle, saying she wanted to "have a conversation" with the judge.
But defendants are not allowed to speak directly to the judges, Sommermeyer said. Their attorneys must speak for them.
Hulett's lawyer was not in the courtroom at the time because he was assigned to be in Justice Court that morning, but on the tape other attorneys can be heard advising Hulett to be quiet.
Hulett, who was already in custody at the Clark County Detention Center, had been scheduled to be arraigned on one count of attempted battery with substantial bodily harm, but the hearing was delayed because of scheduling conflicts, Sommermeyer said.
The charge was in connection with an Aug. 2 incident in which police allege Hulett hit Maxine Grey, a neighbor, with her car, according to the arrest affidavit.
Hulett can be heard on the tape complaining about the delay to Hardcastle, who had already moved on to the next case. The judge told Hulett to be quiet, but Hulett continued to talk.
Hardcastle told Hulett, "You are interrupting my court madam. I will put you in jail for contempt of court and you are going to stay in jail for a long period of time if you keep it up." Hardcastle then ordered her to be removed from the courtroom.
Hulett continued to talk and Hardcastle ordered her to serve 25 days.
"You don't have no sympathy for nothing," Hulett told the judge. "I am trying to have a conversation with you."
Hardcastle replied by issuing another 25-day sentence, and, as others in the courtroom encouraged Hulett to be quiet, the woman said, "No, I don't need no attorney. I can represent myself cause she don't understand me."
Hardcastle raised the sentence to 100 days, and Hulett continued, getting louder and starting to use profanities.
"She was warned by the judge," Sommermeyer said.
Deputy Public Defender Mark Cichoski said his client had been in the psychiatric ward at Clark County Detention Center and is on various medications.
"That probably had something to do with it," he said. "Most people don't get into shouting matches with the judge."
Cichoski said when he spoke to Hulett in jail Thursday, she was sorry and did not speak badly about the judge.
"She knew she was in trouble," Cichoski said. "She was sorry it happened."
Cooper was surprised that the judge decided that every time Hulett spoke was a separate instance of contempt. He said his office would look at the situation.
Cooper described contempt of court "a statutory power that should be exercised judiciously with compelling reasons."
"This kind of judicial behavior, we as an office need to be able to address," he said.
Sommermeyer said contempt of court is designed to "get a defendant's attention that the judge intends to maintain decorum."
Hulett is still facing an attempted battery charge that Cichoski said she plans to plead guilty to. That can be classified as either a felony, punishable by one to four years in jail, or as a gross misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail.
Cichoski said he has advised Hulett about proper court etiquette and hopes there won't be any more problems. She did fine in earlier Justice Court appearances, he said.
Clients don't always heed the warnings of their lawyers, said Daniel Dodson, spokesman for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Many times they are angry about being in the legal system.
If a client is held in contempt, Dodson said, the lawyer's job is "to help the client understand the system and what proper behavior is."
A judge might reconsider the punishment if the defendant shows remorse and understanding, Dodson said.
The use of the power to hold someone in contempt is up to each judge, said Bill Dressel, president of the National Judicial College in Reno. But findings can be reviewed by an appellate court.
archive
