Lessley v. Shope, Jr. ( 1998 )


Menu:
  • MARY E. LESSLEY,                      )
    )
    Petitioner/Appellee,           )       Appeal No.
    )       01-A-01-9710-CV-00617
    v.                                    )
    )       Robertson Circuit
    CHARLES SHOPE, JR.,                   )       No. DR-7862
    )
    Respondent/Appellant.          )
    FILED
    July 17, 1998
    COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    Cecil W. Crowson
    Appellate Court Clerk
    APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ROBERTSON COUNTY
    AT SPRINGFIELD, TENNESSEE
    THE HONORABLE CAROL CATALANO, JUDGE
    JOHN KNOX WALKUP
    Attorney General & Reporter
    SUE A. SHELDON
    Assistant Attorney General
    2nd Floor, Cordell Hull Building
    425 5th Avenue, North
    Nashville, Tennessee 37243
    ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONER/APPELLEE
    COLLIER W. GOODLETT
    Assistant Public Defender
    19th Judicial District
    109 S. Second Street
    Clarksville, Tennessee 37040
    ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT/APPELLANT
    REVERSED AND REMANDED
    WILLIAM B. CAIN, JUDGE
    OPINION
    This case involves an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court of
    Robertson County, Tennessee, imposing a fifty dollar ($50.00) fine upon the
    appellant together with a ten (10) day jail sentence for contempt of court in
    failing to pay child support.
    At the behest of the District Attorney's Office on July 3, 1997, Judge
    Carol Catalano issued an order of attachment for the body of the appellant,
    Charles Shope, Jr., reciting as follows:
    You are hereby commanded to arrest the above named
    Respondent and have him appear on August 20, 1997 at 1:30
    P.M. before the CIRCUIT Court for ROBERTSON County,
    Tennessee to answer a charge that you are in contempt of
    court for failing to comply with the orders of the Court to-
    wit: the payment of child support and/or failure to appear for
    Court. At the above hearing, if you are found to be in
    contempt of court, the District Attorney's Office will request
    incarceration.
    The attachment was issued pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated
    section 36-5-405(d) and bond was set in the amount of ". . . $2,500.00 cash".
    Appellant was arrested on said attachment on July 14, 1997, with
    hearing set for 1:30 p.m., August 20, 1997.
    On July 23, 1997, appellant filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas
    corpus in the Circuit Court for Robertson County, Tennessee, asserting a right
    to immediate release from confinement.
    On July 25, 1997 appellant filed an affidavit of indigency before
    Honorable John H. Gasaway, Jr. Judge Gasaway entered an order that same day
    finding appellant indigent, appointing counsel and providing as follows:
    -2-
    IN THIS CAUSE, it appearing to the court that the
    Defendant is before the Court on a charge of Contempt for
    failure to pay child support and
    It further appearing to the Court that the defendant is
    indigent and unable to employ counsel and is thereby
    qualified for appointed legal counsel,
    It is therefore ordered by the Court that the Public Defender,
    a member of the Robertson County Bar Association is hereby
    appointed to represent the siad (sic) defendant.
    This order further provided in a hand written addendum from Judge
    Gasaway bearing the same date:
    The court further orders that the current cash bond of $2,500
    be converted to a recognizance bond of $2,500. Further, the
    current hearing date of August 20, 1997 at 1:30 p.m. shall
    remain as set. A copy of this order shall be delivered to the
    public defender and to the respondent, receipt to be
    acknowledged by the respondent. Writ of habeas corpus
    denied.
    On August 16, 1997, still acting pro se, the appellant filed an extensive
    motion to dismiss on various constitutional and statutory grounds.
    The petition for contempt was heard on September 17, 1997 and an
    "appearance mittimus" was issued by Judge Catalano on September 17, 1997
    with a hand written notation "ten days to serve w/ credit for time served."
    On September 18, 1997, the appellant, again acting pro se, filed a
    notice of appeal from the judgment of September 17. On that same date he
    likewise filed a notice that no transcript or stenographic record of the proceeding
    of September 17, 1997 would be filed on the appeal.
    On September 25, 1997 Judge Catalano entered an order approved for
    entry by John H. Lynch, child support attorney for the District Attorney's Office,
    which provided as follows:
    This cause came on to be heard on the 17th day os (sic)
    September, 1997, before the HONORABLE CAROL
    CATALANO, Judge of the DOMESTIC RELATIONS
    COURT, upon an Attachment, the Respondent appearing in
    person. It appearing that $1,104.76 has been paid in this
    -3-
    matter since the Respondent was ordered to pay $50.00 (plus
    5% clerks fee), per week beginning August 20, 1991. The
    arrearage now owing in this matter is $18,149.99 including
    a previous judgment awarded on 6-05-96. The last payment
    made was on 3-25-92.
    IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND
    DECREED by the Court that the Respondent is found in
    contempt and is sentenced to spend 10 days in the Robertson
    County Jail. Siad (sic) sentence is to be suspended to 10
    days already served. The Petitioner is awarded a judgment
    for $18,149.99 (plus 5% clerks fee), the amount of back
    support owing in this matter.
    The Respondent shall pay $50.00 per week (plus 5%
    clerks fee), and $25.00 per week (plus 5% clerks fee) on the
    arrearage owing in this matter beginning 9-26-97.
    Respondent is to pay a $50.00 fine plus any Court costs in
    this matter by 10-17-97.
    Appellant had filed his pro se notice of appeal to the Court of Criminal
    Appeals. On October 28, 1997 that court acknowledged that it was without
    jurisdiction to consider the appeal under Tennessee Code Annotated § 16-5-108
    and transferred the case to this court pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 17.
    On December 3, 1997, this court ordered that the trial judge certify the
    following question for review, "whether the appellant was represented by
    counsel or whether he executed a written waiver of his right to the aid of counsel
    after being advised in open court of said right."
    On December 10, 1997 Judge Catalano responded to this court's order
    by certifying, "that the record is silent as to whether the appellant was
    represented by counsel and that there is no written waiver of the appellant's right
    to the aid of counsel."
    On December 11, 1997, an order was entered in this court extending the
    time for the filing of the appellant's brief through January 12, 1998. On January
    22, 1998, public defender Michael R. Jones was granted thirty (30) days within
    which to file a brief on behalf of the appellant. On January 23, 1998, Sue A.
    Sheldon on behalf of the Attorney General of Tennessee filed a notice of
    appearance before this court. On April 22, 1998, Honorable Collier W. Goodlett,
    -4-
    Assistant Public Defender, filed a brief in this case on behalf of the appellant and
    therein waived oral argument. On May 22, 1998, Honorable Sue A. Sheldon on
    behalf of the Attorney General of Tennessee filed a brief of the appellee also
    waiving oral argument.
    Such is the state of the record before this court.
    Appellant asserts in part the following:
    ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER ONE: THAT
    THE CHANCERY COURT, AFTER HAVING
    APPOINTED COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE
    RESPONDENT, ERRED IN PROCEEDING WITHOUT
    COUNSEL PRESENT FOR THE RESPONDENT.
    ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER TWO: THAT
    THE CHANCERY COURT AFTER HAVING APPOINTED
    COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE RESPONDENT ERRED
    IN SENTENCING THE RESPON D E NT TO
    INCARCERATION WHEN COUNSEL FAILED TO
    APPEAR TO REPRESENT THE RESPONDENT AND THE
    RESPONDENT HAVING NOT WAIVED HIS RIGHT TO
    COUNSEL.
    Counsel thereupon briefs extensively and convincingly these issues
    acknowledging his debt to academic sources. Says counsel:
    We have all drunk from wells we did not dig. Anon.
    Counsel has drunk deeply and shamelessly from the
    following wells: 30 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 627, Spring, 1989,
    THE RIGHT TO APPOINTED COUNSEL FOR INDIGENT
    CIVIL LITIGANTS: THE DEMANDS OF DUE PROCESS,
    William L. Dick, Jr.; 50 U. Chi. L. Rev. 326, Winter, 1983,
    THE INDIGENT DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO COURT-
    APPOINTED COUNSEL IN CIVIL CONTEMPT
    PROCEEDINGS FOR NONPAYMENT OF CHILD
    SUPPORT, Robert Monk; 9 St. Thomas L. Rev. 767, Spring
    1997, INDIGENT CONTEMNORS BEWARE:                       IN
    FLORIDA, YOU MAY BE INCARCERATED WITHOUT
    BEING APPOINTED COUNSEL!, Neal G. Bourda; 
    14 N.M. L
    . Rev. 275, Spring, 1984, FATHERS BEHIND BARS:
    THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL IN CIVIL CONTEMPT
    PROCEEDINGS, Michele Hermann and Shannon Donahue.
    In brief before this court the state concedes and this court agrees that
    -5-
    the contempt charged in this case was criminal contempt and that the trial court
    having appointed counsel for the defendant could not then proceed to try the
    merits of the criminal contempt petition in the absence of appointed counsel and
    without a waiver by the appellant of his right to counsel. Rule 13 Tenn. Sup. Ct.
    Rules; Storey v. Storey, 
    835 S.W.2d 593
    (Tenn. App. 1992).
    Appellant asserts three other issues on appeal; in view of our reversal
    on other grounds we find consideration of these issues to be unnecessary.
    This court does not attempt in this case to determine the parameters
    within which indigent defendants are entitled to appointed counsel in civil or
    criminal contempt cases based upon failure to pay child support. We only
    determine that in this case, where the trial court has found indigency and
    appointed counsel, that it is improper to proceed with the merits of criminal
    contempt in the absence of that appointed counsel, without first securing a
    knowing waiver from the appellant of his right to be so represented.
    The judgment of the trial court finding the appellant in criminal
    contempt and sentencing him to incarceration for a fixed period of time is
    reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not
    inconsistent with this opinion. Costs of this appeal are assessed against the
    appellee.
    ________________________________
    WILLIAM B. CAIN, JUDGE
    CONCUR:
    __________________________________
    BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE
    -6-
    __________________________________
    WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., JUDGE
    -7-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01A01-9710-CV-00617

Filed Date: 7/17/1998

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014